Karnataka High Court
L N Satish vs Munihanumaiah on 29 July, 2024
Author: V Srishananda
Bench: V Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:29859
RFA No. 1784 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 1784 OF 2021 (INJ)
BETWEEN:
1. L N SATISH
S/O R LAKSHMINARAYANA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT NO 63, 71ST CROSS, 5TH BLOCK
RAJAJINAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010.
2. B SATHYANARAYANA SINGH
S/O LATE BALAJI SINGH
AGE ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT NO.13, "SRI BALAJI NILAYA"
T SEETHARAMAIAH NILAYA
YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE - 560 022.
Digitally
signed by
MALATESH 3. K S RAVIKUMAR
KC S/O SHIVANNA
Location: AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
HIGH R/AT NO.294, "O" CROSS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1ST MAIN, 1ST BLOCK
NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE - 560 072.
4. SMT JYOTHI
W/O NAGARAJ M
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.462, 12TH MAIN
WOC ROAD, MANJUNATHANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 010.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SUNDAR RAJ.,ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:29859
RFA No. 1784 of 2021
AND:
1. MUNIHANUMAIAH
S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
DEAD BY LRS
1a). M MUNISWAMY
S/O MUNIHANUMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
1b). HANUMANTHA
S/O MUNIHANUMAIAH
AGE ABOUT 54 YEARS
1c). RAMAKRISHNA
S/O MUNIHANUMAIAH
AGE ABOUT 52 YEARS
1d). MURTHY
S/O MUNISWAMY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
1e). GOPAL
S/O MUNISWAMY
AGEd ABOUT 47 YEARS
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
VEERANAPALYA
VISHWANEEDAM POST
SREEGANDADAKAVAL
YESHWANTHPUR HOBLI,
BANGALORE - 560 091.
2. KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT
"D" GROUP EMPLOYEES CENTRAL ASSOCIATION
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
M S BUILDING, 2ND STAGE
BENGALURU REP BY ITS PRESIDENT
B M NATARAJ
...RESPONDENTS
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:29859
RFA No. 1784 of 2021
THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER SECTION 96 OF CPC
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.11.2017
PASSED IN OS.NO.3395/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXV
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU,
DECREEING THE SUIT FOR INJUNCTION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri. Sundar Raj, learned counsel for the
appellants on I.A.No.2/2021. Appellants claim to be
the site owner allotted by the Defendant/Society in
O.S.No.3395/2011. The erstwhile owner of the land,
over which the layout has been developed by him Sri.
M. Munihanumaiah represented by his general power
of attorney holder filed a suit in O.S.No.3395/2011
against the Karnataka State Government, 'D' Group
Employee's Central Association Register and obtained
an order of injunction.
2. It is the complaint of the appellants that
they being the site owners allotted by the
Defendant/Society, was not made as a party on the
NC: 2024:KHC:29859
basis of the decree that has been obtained in
O.S.No.3395/2011, the power of attorney holder of
the plaintiff is trying to interfere with the peaceful
possession and enjoyment of the appellants herein.
3. Sri. Sundar Raj also submits that he has
filed an injunction suit and it has been decreed in his
favour including the present plaintiff who was
defendant therein.
4. Under such circumstances, since there is
already a decree in favour of the plaintiff, the alleged
interference, if any, will be in violation of the decree
that has been passed in favour of the appellants
herein. Therefore, necessary action is to be taken for
the violation of the injunction order.
5. With that liberty present appeal cannot be
entertained by a non party to the suit.
6. Hence, the following order:
NC: 2024:KHC:29859
ORDER
i. I.A.No.2/2021 is rejected.
ii. Consequently, the appeal is also rejected.
iii. Pending I.A's are consigned the records.
Sd/-
(V SRISHANANDA)
JUDGE
AMA
