order dated 24.06.2025 passed on I.A. No.I filed under
Interim Application No.2 is dismissed."
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
2. Brief facts of the case are that, the plaintiff-
Manik Prabhu filed O.S.No.09/2025 for partition and
separate possession of 1/11th share in the suit schedule
property. He also filed I.A.No.1, seeking an interim
injunction. An exparte ad-interim injunction was granted in
his favour, restraining defendant No.1 from alienating the
suit schedule property, on 15.01.2025. Defendant No.1
appeared before the Court and filed I.A.No.2 to vacate the
said exparte interim order, on 30.01.2025. He also filed
written statement and memo to treat the written
statement as objections to I.A. No.1 on 24.02.2025. As
the orders are not passed within 30 days, he filed
W.P.No.201226/2025 and direction was given by this
Court on 09.06.2025 to the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC,
Humnabad to dispose of the matter within 30 days.
Accordingly, the Senior Civil Judge allowed I.A.No.1 and
restrained defendant No.1 not to alienate the suit property
and rejected I.A.No.2 filed for vacating the exparte
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
ad-interim injunction order. Aggrieved by the said order,
this appeal is filed.
3. Heard the arguments of both sides.
4. On 10.01.2025, Manik Prabhu filed a suit for
partition in O.S.No.09/2025, but the property is owned
and possessed by third parties i.e., M/s. Sri Sai Chitra
Mandira. He stated that, the plaintiff and defendants are
the joint owners and possessors of the suit open space
bearing T.M.C.No.20-82 corresponding PID No.5-3-13
totally ad-measuring 3893.286021 square meters,
situated abutting National Highway bypass road in
Humnabad, District Bidar. The plaintiff stated that,
defendant No.1 and himself are real brothers. They are
the members of Hindu joint family. The said Sai Chitra
Mandira was purchased from join family funds. As such,
he is entitled for equal share in Sy.No.176, which is
converted non-agricultural land fit for layout. He stated
that, defendant No.1 is not giving any share to him. The
property is an ancestral property, which was nominally
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
standing in the name of defendant No.1. He stated that,
the plaintiff, defendant Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 6 to 8, husband of
defendant No.2, father of defendant No.5 and the husband
of defendant No.9 formed a partnership firm for
establishing Sai Chitra Mandira through registered
partnership deed dated 25.09.1986. The firm has acquired
non-agricultural converted land in Sy.No.176 measuring 1
acre 1 gunta in a public auction conducted by Khadi and
Village Industries Board, Bidar in the name of defendant
No.4 - Sidramayya. The Board has executed the
registered sale deed in the name of defendant No.4 vide
document No.141/85-86 dated 16.12.1985 and all the
partners of the firm are having equal share in it. The
husband of defendant No.3 expired on 18.01.2001, hence,
defendant No.3 became his successor. The father of
defendant No.6 expired on 20.11.2013 and defendant
No.6 became successor. The husband of defendant No.10
expired on 20.12.2013 and defendant No.10 became
successor. Thus, defendant No.3, defendant No.6 and
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
defendant No.10 succeeded 1/11th share of their
husband/father. As the theatre was not running properly,
they resolved to demolish the entire structure and
presently it is an open space. They have also resolved to
dissolve the partnership firm and paid all the dues of their
creditors. The plaintiff approached the defendants for
1/11th share. Initially, defendants agreed for it, but later,
postponing the same on one or other pretext. The plaintiff
requested them finally on 04.04.2024. Defendant No.1
filed O.S.No.81/2024. He also filed an application for
withdrawal of the suit. Again cause of action arose on
03.12.2024.
5. The Senior Civil Judge, Humnabad, granted an
exparte ad-interim order restraining defendant No.1 from
alienating the property on 15.01.2025, but there was no
compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the Code of Civil
Procedure. Later, defendant No.1 filed an application - I.A.
No.2 to vacate the exparte ad-interim order and also filed
written statement. As the Senior Civil Judge has not
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
disposed of the matter within time, they approached the
High Court and got orders and accordingly, the Senior Civil
Judge allowed I.A.No.1, but rejected I.A.No.2.
6. On 30.03.2024, the plaintiff/respondent No.1
herein filed an impleading application to implead him as
defendant No.10 in O.S.No.81/2024. In view of settlement
outside the Court, withdrawal application is filed in
O.S.No.81/2024. The respondent herein filed objections on
04.01.2025 and the matter was adjourned to 12.02.2025.
Later, suit was disposed of on 11.03.2025 as settled out of
the Court.
7. This appeal is filed by defendant No.1 against
the order of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Humnabad
dated 24.06.2025 contending that, the plaintiff is a
stranger to the suit schedule property and he is not a
partner in the partnership firm. The revenue documents
are in the name of defendant No.4 and thus, requested to
set aside the order dated 24.06.2025 passed on I.A. Nos.1
and 2 in O.S. No.09.2025.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
8. An application was filed by the plaintiff and
defendants on 03.12.2024 stating that, the matter is
settled outside the court and plaintiff and defendants
agreed to own and enjoy the suit properties and thus, they
intended to withdraw the suit in O.S.No.81/2024. It was
disposed of on 11.03.2025 as per the daily status. The
perusal of the partnership deed shows that, Manik Prabhu
is not a party to it. But, the Senior Civil Judge observed
that, the plaintiff and defendants are brothers and it was
admitted by the first defendant. The suit property was
purchased by the first defendant from joint family funds.
After filing of the objections, the exparte order passed in
I.A.No.1 was not extended and Senior Civil Judge
observed that, if the defendant sell the suit property,
plaintiff will suffer loss and damage and accordingly,
restrained the defendants from selling the suit property till
the disposal of the suit or till 31.10.2025, whichever is
earlier. The plaintiff is a brother of defendant No.1, but it
cannot be said that, he is entitled for 1/11th share in the
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7043
HC-KAR
property. He is a stranger to partnership deed. It is for
him to prove that the property is purchased from the joint
family funds and the property is an ancestral property.
Infact, plaintiff and defendants in O.S.No.81/2024 settled
the matter outside the Court and they have withdrawn the
suit. Therefore, the order passed by the Senior Civil Judge
is without appreciation of proper facts and is liable to be
set aside.
9. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The order
dated 24.06.2025 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Humnabad on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.09/2025 is
hereby set aside.
sd/-
(P SREE SUDHA)
JUDGE
LG
