IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT W.P.NOS.9536-9537 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN SRI.CHIKKAPPAIAH, S/O LATE M.GANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT GUVVALAHALLI VILLAGE, MANCHENAHALLI HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK-561208. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI.H.K.NARAYANA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAJESWARA.P.N, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI.N.GANGAPPA, S/O LATE NARASIMHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YELARS, 2. SRI.PUJAPPA, S/O LATE M.GANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT GUVVALAHALLI VILLAGE, MANCHENAHALLI HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK-561208. ... RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE JUDGMENT DTD 30.01.2019 IN M.A.NO.09/2018 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, GOWRIBIDANUR VIDE ANNX-A AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R Petitioner being the defendant in 1st respondent’s suit in O.S.No.52/2017 is knocking at the door of writ court for assailing the order dated 03.01.2009, a copy whereof is at Annexure-A, whereby the learned Sr. Civil Judge, Gauribidanur having dismissed his M.A.No.9/2018 has affirmed the order dated 19.06.2018 made by the learned Addl. Civil Judge, Gauribidanur granting ad-interim injunctive relief to the respondent-plaintiff.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that the impugned order is unsustainable since there was no scope for granting the order of temporary injunction by the learned trial Judge at all; this having not been adverted to by the Lower Appellate Court, there is error apparent on the face of the record.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the petition papers, this court declines interference in the matter since both the Courts below have concurrently opined in favour of the respondent-plaintiff, especially when no palpable error has been pointed out from the record; this apart the Lower Appellate Court has adverted to the judgment & decree in O.S.No.154/2010 suffered by the petitioner; the same has been affirmed in R.A.No.112/2015; even the R.S.A.No.661/2017 against the same has ended in dismissal.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition being devoid of merits is rejected in limine. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to move an appropriate application in his pending R.P.No.15/2019, if grounds do exist therefor.
Sd/-
JUDGE cbc