IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA M.F.A. NO.2301 OF 2017(GM – CPC) C/W M.F.A. NOs.2302/2017, 2303/2017, 2304/2017, 2305/2017(GM – CPC) IN M.F.A.NO.2301/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. HARISH C S/O LATE J.C.CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.646 4TH C MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT BANGALORE - 43 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.K.M.LAKSHMINARAYANA SETTY S/O LATE KRISHNAIAH SETTY AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT BIDARAHALLI VILLAGE BIDARAHALLI HOBLI BANGALORE EAST TALUK – 560 049 2. SRI.N.SUDHAKAR S/O LATE G.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDENT OF LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, KASHI VISHWANATHA LAYOUT, K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV. FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 01.08.2017) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.I IN O.S.NO.6401/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 56TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ALLOWING I.A.NO.I FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
IN M.F.A.NO.2302/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. HARISH C S/O LATE J.C.CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.646 4TH C MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT BANGALORE - 43 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.K.S. SURESH BABU S/O LATE J. KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.10/1, 1ST FLOOR 1ST CROSS, 1ST BLOCK ANANDNAGARA BENGALURU – 560 032 2. SRI.N.SUDHAKAR S/O LATE G.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDENT OF LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, KASHI VISHWANATHA LAYOUT, K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV. FOR C/R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.6400/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE LVII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ALLOWING I.A.NO.I FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
IN M.F.A.NO.2303/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. HARISH C S/O LATE J.C.CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.646 4TH C MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT BANGALORE - 43 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.K.GANESH S/O SRI. M.KENCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 2. SMT. R.GEETHASHREE W/O SRI.K.GANESH AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.168, 1ST CROSS, V.B.LAYOUT K.R.PURAM BENGALURU - 560 036 3. SRI.N.SUDHAKAR S/O LATE G.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDENT OF LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, KASHI VISHWANATHA LAYOUT, K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV. FOR C/R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.07.2017, NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.6402/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 56TH AND 57TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, ALLOWING I.A.NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
IN M.F.A.NO.2304/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. HARISH C S/O LATE J.C.CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.646 4TH C MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT BANGALORE - 43 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.GOPINATH P.V. SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRs.
1(a) SMT. L.ARUNA KUMARI W/O LATE GOPINATH P.V AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 1(b) MR.CHAAYANK B.G S/O LATE GOPINATH P.V AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS 1(c) MR.KUSHANK B.G S/O LATE GOPINATH P.V AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.C-001 ADARSH PALACE APARTMENT 47TH CROSS, 9TH MAIN JAYANAGAR 5TH BLOCK BENGALURU – 560 041 (AMENDED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 13.10.2017) 2. SRI.N.SUDHAKAR S/O LATE G.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDENT OF LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, KASHI VISHWANATHA LAYOUT, K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV. FOR C/R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.6403/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 56TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ALLOWING I.A.NO.I FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
IN M.F.A.NO.2305/2017 BETWEEN:
SRI. HARISH C S/O LATE J.C.CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.646 4TH C MAIN, OMBR LAYOUT BANGALORE - 43 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. VENUGOPAL M.S., ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. JWALNAMMA W/O H.A.PARSHWANATHA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT KASHI VISHWANATHA LAYOUT 3RD CROSS NEW POLICE STATION ROAD KRISHNARAJAPURAM BANGALORE – 560 036 2. SRI.N.SUDHAKAR S/O LATE G.NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDENT OF LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA 3RD CROSS, KASHI VISHWANATHA LAYOUT K.R.PURAM BENGALURU – 560 036 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV. FOR C/R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, 1908 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2016 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.6404/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 56TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ALLOWING I.A.NO.I FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THESE MFAs COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGEMNT All these appeals are filed against the order dated 16.12.2016 made in O.S.Nos. 6401/2016, 6400/2016, 6402/2016, 6403/2016 and 6404/2016 granting injunction allowing the applications filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 in favour of the plaintiff on the file of the 57th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.
2. The respondents who are the plaintiffs in the respective suits filed O.S. Nos. 6401/2016, 6400/2016, 6402/2016, 6403/2016 and 6404/2016 for permanent injunction in respect of residential sites morefully described in the schedule to each of the plaint contending that the plaintiffs are the owners and in possession of the suit schedule properties and defendants have no manner of right, title or interest in interfering with the same.
3. During the pendency of the suits, the plaintiff filed applications in each of the suits for grant of temporary injunction. Reiterating the averments made in the plaint, the same was disputed by defendant No.2 alone by filing the objections denying the averments made therein. The trial court considering the applications and objections, by a common order dated 16.12.2016 allowed IA NO.1 filed in all the suits and granted injunction until the disposal of the said suits. Hence the present appeals are filed.
4. When the matters came up for admission before this court on 01.08.2017 and subsequent dates, learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that from the prayer in the plaint as well as IAs in all the suits, there is no clarity in the relief sought for and in the absence of proper pleadings, the trial court was not justified in granting the order of temporary injunction. Therefore, this court recording the submission of the appellant granted interim prayer as sought for a period of eight weeks.
5. Today, Sri. Krishna Kishore, learned counsel for the first respondent in all the appeals and plaintiff in all the suits fairly submits that subsequent to the order passed by this court, the plaintiff in all the suits field proper application under Order VI Rule 17 for amendment of the prayer and the trial court considering the applications and objections, by order dated 08.09.2017 allowed the applications in all the suits and subsequently the plaintiff filed amended plaint also in the respective suits.
6. He further submits that in view of the above, liberty may be reserved to the plaintiff in all the suits to file fresh applications for temporary injunction since the prayer is properly amended.
7. The same is not opposed by the learned counsel for the appellants, Sri. Venugopal. He submitted that any observations made by the trial court while passing the impugned orders shall not come in the way, either of the parties to establish their case or the orders to be passed by the trial court on the applications filed by the plaintiff/first respondent.
8. In view of the fair submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties, without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case, it is suffice to dispose off the appeals with a liberty to the plaintiff/first respondent in all the suits (O.S. Nos. 6401/2016, 6400/2016, 6402/2016, 6403/2016 and 6404/2016) to file fresh applications for Temporary injunction in accordance with law.
9. If such application/s is/are filed, the trial court shall consider the same after giving opportunity to the present appellants/defendants and pass orders strictly in accordance with law.
10. Any observations made by the trial court while passing the impugned order dated 16.08.2016 shall not come in the way, either of the parties to prove their case/establish their rights in accordance with law.
With the above observations the appeals are disposed of.
Till the consideration of such applications to be field the by parties before by the trial court, both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo as on today, in respect of the suit schedule properties.
Sd/-
JUDGE Bsv