Karnataka High Court
Sri. Vinod S/O Narayanrao Chorage vs Sri. Vikasrao S/O Vithalrao Savant on 27 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16568
MFA No. 101914 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101914 OF 2025 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. VINOD S/O. NARAYANRAO CHORAGE,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. #470, KRISHNA BAI JADHAV BUILDING,
SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI, TQ: NIPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 237.
2. SANJAY S/O. NARAYAN CHORAGE,
AGE: 63 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURE,
R/O: #470, SAKHARWADI,
NEAR MARUTI MANDIR, NIPANI,
TQ: NIPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI - 591 237.
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI 3. AVANTI W/O. PRAKASH BIRANJE,
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: 1642, E-WARD, RAJARAMPURI 7TH LANE,
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD NEAR CHANDRAKANT MANDRE ART GALLERY,
KOLHAPUR, TQ: KARVIR,
DIST: KOLHAPUR,
MAHARASHTRA-416 008.
4. LEENA W/O. RAJENDRA KARNURE @ PATIL,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: 2715/3, 1ST CROSS,
BEHIND MRF SHOWROOM,
NEW VAIBHAV NAGAR, KANGRALI B.K.,
BELAGAVI, TQ/DIST: BELAGAVI.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16568
MFA No. 101914 of 2025
HC-KAR
5. PRAMOD S/O. VILAS CHORAGE,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: #470, SAKHARWADI,
NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI, TQ: NIPANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-591 237.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. N.D. GUNDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. VIKASRAO
S/O. VITHALRAO SAVANT,
AGE: 71 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI-591 237,
TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. PUSHKRAJ S/O. VIKASRAO SAVANT,
AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: PVT JOB,
R/O. SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI-591 237, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
3. VINAYA W/O. VIKASRAO SAVANT,
AGE: 61 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI-591 237, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
4. JAYAKUMAR S/O. VIJAYKUMAR SAVANT,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI-591 237, TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
5. PALLAVI VIJAYAKUMAR SAVANT,
AGE: YEARS, OCC: HOMEMAKER,
R/O. SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPANI-591 237,
TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16568
MFA No. 101914 of 2025
HC-KAR
6. RAJKUMAR S/O. VITHALRAO SAVANT,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: SAKHARWADI,
NEAR MARUTI MANDIR, NIPPANI - 591 237,
TQ: NIPPANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
7. VISHWASRAO S/O. VITHALRAO SAVANT,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPPANI - 591 237, TQ: NIPPANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
8. SULAKSHANA W/O. RAGHUNATH RANE,
R/O: SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPPANI - 591 237, TQ: NIPPANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
9. SWAPNALI W/O. VISHWANATH MORE,
R/O: SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPPANI - 591 237, TQ: NIPPANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
10. SHAMAL W/O. SUSHANT PATIL,
R/O: SAKHARWADI, NEAR MARUTI MANDIR,
NIPPANI - 591 237, TQ: NIPPANI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLI, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF THE
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RELEVANT RECORDS; AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL, BY SETTING
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2025 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NIPPANI IN O.S.NO.111/2024
THEREBY REJECTING I.A. NO-1 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1
AND 2 OF C.P.C.; AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW INTERIM
APPLICATION NO.1/2024 FILED BY THE APPELLANTS UNDER
ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 AND ETC.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16568
MFA No. 101914 of 2025
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
This appeal is the outcome of the order that is
rendered by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Nippani on
I.A.No.I in O.S.No.111/2024 dated 04.04.2025.
2. Heard Sri Santosh B. Mane who represented Sri
Neelendra D. Gunde learned counsel on record for the
appellants as well as Sri Sivaraj S. Balloli learned counsel
on record for respondents 1 to 10. Submissions were made
on 17.11.2025 and the matter was ordered to be listed on
this day under the caption for 'dictating judgment' and
accordingly the matter is listed on this day.
3. Though the arguments were advanced by both
the learned counsel at length regarding the merits of the
matter on 17.11.2025, on this day Sri Santosh B. Mane
learned counsel for the appellants submits that the
appellants filed I.A.No.I seeking the Court to restrain the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16568
HC-KAR
respondents/defendants and their men from alienating,
transferring, mortgaging and from changing the nature of
the suit properties till the disposal of the suit. Learned
counsel submits that the apprehension of the appellants is
that the respondents may alienate the properties, which
leads to multiplicity of proceedings and therefore it is
enough if temporary injunction only in respect of alienation
is granted.
4. Sri Shivaraj S. Balloli learned counsel for
respondents states that though the appellants have no case
on merits yet with an intention that the matter is required
to be disposed of on merits by the Trial Court expeditiously
and as there is no intention on part of the respondents/
defendants to alienate the properties, hence the appeal may
be disposed of granting injunction only in respect of
alienation.
5. Thus having considered the consensus that is
arrived by both the learned counsel and as the core issue is
with regard to the registered Will of the year 1950 over
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16568
HC-KAR
which the appellants relies upon and the registered Will of
the year 1957 over which the respondents relies upon and
which of the Wills is required to be held valid and
enforceable and that issue has to be decided by the Trial
Court after recording evidence, this Court considers
desirable to dispose of the appeal granting injunction so far
as alienation of the suit properties is concerned. Thus the
appeal is disposed of with the following:
ORDER
(i) The order that is rendered by the Court of
Senior Civil Judge, Nippani on I.A.No.I in
O.S.No.111/2024 dated 04.04.2025 is
modified.
(ii) Respondents/defendants 1 to 10 are
directed not to alienate the suit properties
till final disposal of the suit.
(iii) The Trial Court is called upon to dispose of
the suit as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
EM
CT-MCK
