R Kempanna vs Smt A Lakshmi
2024 Latest Caselaw 3276 Kant

Karnataka High Court

R Kempanna vs Smt A Lakshmi on 2 February, 2024

                                                 -1-
                                                         NC: 2024:KHC:4717
                                                       RFA No. 112 of 2011




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                             BEFORE
                              THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI
                         REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 112 OF 2011 (INJ)
                   BETWEEN:

                   R KEMPANNA, S/O LATE RAMAIAH,
                   AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
                   R/A NO.22 (OLD NO. 15),
                   KADIRANAPALYA,
                   INDIRANAGAR POST,
                   BANGALORE-38.
                                                              ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI MADHURANATH PADAKI S, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.    SMT. A LAKSHMI,
                         W/O LATE SIGAMANI,
                         AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS.
                   2.    ASHOK KUMAR,
Digitally signed         S/O A LAKSHMI,
by                       AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.
ANNAPURNA G
Location: High           BOTH ARE R/O: NO. 46,
Court of                 KADIRANAPALYA,
Karnataka
                         INDIRANAGAR POST,
                         BANGALORE-38.
                                                          ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI A GUNASEKARAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 [PH])
                        THIS RFA IS FILED U/SEC.96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE
                   JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 15.09.2010 PASSED IN
                   O.S.16887/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE IV-ADDL. CITY CIVIL
                   AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BANGALORE,
                   DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION.
                               -2-
                                          NC: 2024:KHC:4717
                                        RFA No. 112 of 2011




     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                         JUDGMENT

None appears for the appellant. The learned counsel

for respondents present.

2. On a perusal of the appeal memo, it is seen that

the grievance of the appellant appears to be that, the

appellant who was the defendant before the trial Court had

filed a memo on 02-08-2010 stating that at no point of

time he had interfered with the possession and enjoyment

of the suit schedule property by the plaintiffs and in

future also, he will not cause any interference to the

respondents/plaintiffs with their peaceful possession and

enjoyment of the suit schedule property. It was contended

that the said memo was not considered by the trial Court

and it has decreed the suit granting injunction against the

defendant/appellant herein.

3. The said contention itself would show that the

appellant herein had undertaken before the trial Court that

he would not interfere with the possession and enjoyment

NC: 2024:KHC:4717

of the suit schedule property by the plaintiffs. By taking

the said memo on record, the suit should have been

disposed of by the trial Court. As such, there was no

necessity for the trial Court to go into the merits of the

matter and to write an elaborate judgment.

4. In that view of the matter, the appeal is liable

to be disposed of taking note of the fact that the appellant

herein who was the defendant before the trial Court had

filed a memo undertaking not to interfere with the

possession of the plaintiffs and the appellant/defendant

shall abide by the memo filed by him before the trial

Court in all respects.

5. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

tsn*