Sri. Nagarajappa v. B Manjappa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.23693/2022 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

¶1SRI. NAGARAJAPPA S/O LAKSHMANAPPA BELAGUTHI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

¶2MR. PAVAN S/O SRI. NAGARAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.

NO.1 & 2 ARE R/AT 17-136(5) SAPTAGIRI NILAYA GREEN PARK LAYOUT NEAR MAHAVEER COLLEGE MUDABIDRE DAKSHINA KANANDA DISTRICT PINCODE 574 227

AND ASLO RESIDENTS OF HITHALA VILLAGE SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶3SRI. BASAVARAJAPPA S/O LAKSHMANAPPA BELAGUTHI AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O MAIN ROAD HITHALA VILLAGE SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:44354( W.P.(No.23693/2022( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010541902022( ( (

4., SARVESHAPPA, S/O,HUCHRAYAPPA, AGED,70,YEARS., ,

5., SUMMEETH, S/O,SARVESHAPPA, AGED,30,YEARS., , NO.4,&,5,ARE,R/AT,, MADIVALA,BEEDI, HITHALA,VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA,TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA,DISTRICT-577214., , …PETITIONERS, (BY,SRI.,DAYALU,K.N.,ADV.,), , AND:( (

1., B.,MANJAPPA, S/O,SHANKARAPPA, AGED,62,YEARS., ,

2., PALAKSHAPPA, S/O,SHANKARAPPA, AGED,55,YEARS., , BOTH,ARE,R/AT,, HITHALA,VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA,TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA,DISTRICT-577214., …RESPONDENTS, , (BY,SRI.,BINBADHAR,M.,GOWDAR,,ADV.,,FOR,C/R1,&,R2), , , THIS,WRIT,PETITION,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLE,227,OF, THE, CONSTITUTION, OF, INDIA,, PRAYING, TO, SET, ASIDE, THE, ORDER,DTD.10.11.2022,PASSED,IN,MA,14/2022,,ON,THE,FILE, OF, THE, SR., CIVIL, JUDGE, AND, JMFC, SHIKARIPURA, I,E., ANNEXURE-AD,BY,DISMISSING,THE,SAID,APPEAL,&,ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated

10.11.2022 passed in M.A.No.14/2022 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Shikaripura (for short, 'the Appellate Court').

¶2Heard Sri.K.N.Dayalu, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri.Bimbadhar M.Gowdar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the material available on record.

¶3The respondents-plaintiffs have filed the suit in O.S.No.241/2021 against petitioners-defendants seeking the relief of injunction. In the said suit, the petitioners filed detailed written statement denying the plaint assertion. The trial Court considered

respondents-plaintiffs' application filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short, 'the CPC') and rejected the same vide order dated 01.04.2022. The respondents-plaintiffs assailed the said order before the Appellate Court in M.A.No.14/2022. The Appellate Court, under the impugned order, allowed the appeal by setting aside the order of the trial Court and granted an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiffs till the disposal of the suit. This petition is filed challenging the said order of the Appellate Court.

¶4It is to be noticed that this Court considering the submissions and the grounds urged, vide order dated

12.12.2022 has directed the parties to maintain status quo with regard to the possession and enjoyment of the suit

schedule property and the said interim order granted by this Court is operating till this day.

¶5It is required to be further noticed that the suit in O.S.241/2021 is pending adjudication and the parties are required to adduce the evidence and in view of the pendency of this writ petition from 2022, the suit has not proceeded further. Therefore, I am of the view that ends of justice would be met if the parties are directed to maintain status quo with regard to the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property till the disposal of suit in O.S.No.241/2021 by the trial Court. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The writ petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits and correctness of the impugned order of the Appellate Court by directing the parties i.e. plaintiffs and defendants, to maintain status quo with regard to

the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property till disposal of suit in O.S.No.241/2021.

No order as to costs.

Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33