Karnataka High Court
Yunusbeig S/O Sikandarbeig ... vs Adibeig S/O Azizbeig Jorammanavar on 14 February, 2024
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3513
WP No. 100590 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.100590 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. YUNUSBEIG S/O. SIKANDARBEIG JORAMMANAVAR,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HANUMANKOPPA STREET,
UPPINBETAGERI, TQ: DIST: DHARWAD-580206.
2. SARFARAJBEIG S/O. SIKANDARBEIG JORAMMANAVAR,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HANUMANKOPPA STREET,
UPPINBETAGERI, TQ: DIST: DHARWAD-580206.
3. TOUSIFBEIG S/O. SIKANDARBEIG JORAMMANAVAR,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HANUMANKOPPA STREET,
UPPINBETAGERI, TQ: DIST: DHARWAD-580206.
4. SADIQBEIG S/O. SIKANDARBEIG JORAMMANAVAR,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HANUMANKOPPA STREET,
UPPINBETAGERI, TQ: DIST: DHARWAD-580206.
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
...PETITIONERS
Digitally signed by
(BY SRI. HAREESHA S. NAYAK, ADVOCATE)
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
Date: 2024.02.15
15:11:58 +0530
AND:
ADIBEIG S/O. AZIZBEIG JORAMMANAVAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O. #64, 1ST CROSS, SHIRADI SAI NAGAR,
K. NARAYANPUR, MAIN ROAD,
BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE-560077.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. B.N. JAMADAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R IN C.P.NO.20223/24)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3513
WP No. 100590 of 2024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED. 11/01/2024 IN M.A. NO. 01/2023 ON THE FILE OF IV
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC DHARWAD BY SETTING
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED. 15/11/2022 ON I.A. NO. IV FILED BY THE
DEFENDANTS/PETITIONERS AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENTS
RESTRAINING HIM FROM INTERFERING WITH THEIR POSSESSION
OVER THE SUIT PROPERTY TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE SUIT IN O.S.
NO. 454/2022 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
DHARWAD WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE AT A AND TO ALLOW
THE I.A. NO. IV FILED BY THE DEFENDANTS / PETITIONERS
AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF / RESPONDENTS RESTRAINING HIM FROM
INTERFERING WITH THEIR POSSESSION OVER THE SUIT PROPERTY
TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE SUIT IN O.S. NO. 454/2022 ON THE FILE
OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AN JMFC DHARWAD VIDE ANNEXURE-K.
THIS PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The petitioners are before this Court seeking the
following reliefs:
i. To set aside the order dated. 11/01/2024 in M.A. No.
01/2023 on the file of IV Addl. Senior CIvil Judge and
JMFC Dharwad by setting aside the order dated.
15/11/2022 on I.A. No. IV filed by the
defendants/petitioners against the
plaintiff/respondents restraining him from interfering
with their possession over the suit property till the
disposal of the suit in O.S. No. 454/2022 on the file
of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC Dharwad which is
produced at Annexure at "A" and to allow the I.A. No.
IV filed by the defendants / petitioners against the
plaintiff / respondents restraining him from
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3513
interfering with their possession over the suit
property till the disposal of the suit in O.S. No.
454/2022 on the file of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC
Dharwad vide Annexure-K.
ii. pass such order or orders which this Hon'ble Court
deems fit and necessary under the facts and
circumstances of the case.
2. The respondent who was the plaintiff has filed a suit
in O.S.No.454/2022 seeking for permanent injunction
restraining the petitioners, who were the defendants
therein from interfering with the possession of the
plaintiff in the said suit. The defendants filed an
application in I.A.No.4 seeking for injunction
restraining the plaintiff from interfering with the
possession of the defendants. The said application
came to be rejected, which came to be challenged in
M.A.No.1/2023, which was also dismissed.
Challenging the same, petitioner is before this Court
seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.
3. In view of the judgment of the full Bench of this Court
in the case of Smt. Shakunthalamma And Others
Vs Smt. Kanthamma And Others reported in 2014
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3513
(4) KCCR 3113, defendant cannot maintain an
application for injunction restraining dispossession
under Order XXXIX Rule 1(c) of the Code of Civil
Procedure, which is what is sought for in the present
petition. The said application not being maintainable,
the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court have
rightly rejected the application.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has already filed a
separate independent suit seeking for injunction.
5. Reserving liberty to agitate the matter in the said suit,
the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
AM
