IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION No.37625/2017 (GM CPC) BETWEEN SRI S D JAYARAMAIAH S/O DODDARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDENT OF SIRIVARA VILLAGE HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572120. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI MAHESH C M, ADV.) AND 1. CHIKKADODDAIAH, S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 2. SANNARAMAIAH S/O LATE RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, 3. NAGANNA S/O LATE PUTTARAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENT OF HUCHAIAHANAPALYA HAMLET SRIVARA VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI TUMKUR TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572120.
4. RAMANNA S/O DODDAMANERAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, R/O GARUDAIAHNAPALYA HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572120.
5. GANGARANGAIAH S/O LATE GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, 6. SRI. JAGANNATHA S/O LATE GANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, 7. S G SHOBHA, D/O GANGARANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 8. S G GIRIJA D/O GANGARANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 9. S G ASHA D/O GANGADHARAIAH AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.5 TO 9 RESIDENTS OF SIRIVARA VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572120. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIJAYA KUMAR S C, ADV. FOR C/R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 15.07.2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT TUMKUR, IN MISC APPEAL NO.17/2016, VIDE ANNX-A AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW I.A.NO.I FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 5 OF CPC, 1908 BEFORE II ADDL SENIOR CIVIL JDUGE & JMFC AT TUMKUR ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Petitioner is before this court being aggrieved by the order dated 15.07.2017 passed by the Lower Appellate Court in Misc. Appeal No.17/2016 whereby the Lower Appellate Court has been pleased to modify the order passed by the trial court rejecting the interlocutory application I.A. No.1/2016.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. It is seen that the Lower Appellate Court by their order impugned has been pleased to direct both the plaintiffs and defendants 15 to 25 to maintain status-quo in respect of such of those properties which are covered under the sale deeds dated 13.07.2015 and 28.06.2013. The order applies in equal force to both the parties and restrains them from alienating the properties covered under the aforesaid two sale deeds or dealing with them in a manner which is prejudicial to the other party. The conclusion is preceded by a detailed consideration. It is seen that the petitioner has not made-out any case as to how the said order has prejudiced his rights in enjoying the property. It being an interim measure and the suit being of the year 2016 and the interim order being in operation since 15.07.2017, this court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the trial court is directed to expedite the consideration and disposal of the suit itself. Admittedly, the suit is one for declaration of plaintiffs’ title over certain properties over which the petitioner/defendants are also asserting their title under a sale deed. Suits of the instant nature are required to be disposed off within 24 months in terms of Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Karnataka (Case Flow Management in Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2005. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off without adverting to the merits and demerits of the case and by leaving open all the contentions.
4. Further the trial court is directed to hear and expedite the disposal of the suit at any rate the trial court shall endeavour to dispose off the suit by 31.12.2019.
The writ petition stands disposed off accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs* CT-HR