IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3076 OF 2013 BETWEEN:
BHAGYALAKSHMI W/O RAMESH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT 730, 6TH MAIN ROAD KRISHNA NADI ROAD BRINDAVAN NAGAR, PIPE LINE ROAD SRINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 050 … APPELLANT (BY SRI R.D.PANCHAM, ADV.) AND:
L.S.MANJUNATHA S/O LATE L.SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS NO.42, 2ND CROSS ROAD MUNESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 051 … RESPONDENT (BY SMT.CHANDRAKALA G., ADV.) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2013 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 IN O.S.NO.8981/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE, REJECTING I.A.NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T Heard both side.
2. By the impugned order, the Trial Court restrained the appellant from putting up construction on the disputed property except on the property in her occupation.
3. This Court on 24.04.2013, granted interim stay of the impugned order on I.A.No.1/2013 filed by the appellant.
4. It is submitted that in view of such interim order, the appellant completed the construction and is in occupation of the building so constructed. Under such circumstances, this appeal does not survive for further consideration.
5. Both counsel submit that subjecting the construction so made by the appellant to the result of the suit, this appeal may be disposed of.
6. Under the circumstances, whatever construction the appellant has made by virtue of the interim order granted by this Court is subject to the result of the suit.
With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE KG