- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1674 WP No. 203739 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE WRIT PETITION NO.203739 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SHASHIDHAR @ OGEPPA S/O. SIDAGONDAPPA PATIL, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DEVARNIMBARAGI, TQ: CHADACHAN, DIST: VIJAYAPUR- 586 205. 2. SUJATA W/O. SHASHIDHAR @ OGEPPA PATIL, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: H.H.WORK, R/O: DEVARNIMBARAGI, TQ: CHADACHAN, DIST: VIJAYAPUR- 586 205. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI D.P.AMBEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DAYANAND S/O. RAVUSAHEB NIRALE, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE CHADACHAN, TQ: CHADACHAN, DIST: VIJAYAPUR 526 205. Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1674 WP No. 203739 of 2024 2. PRABHAKAR S/O RAVUSAHEB NIRALE, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE CHADACHAN, TQ: CHADACHAN, DIST: VIJAYAPUR 526 205. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SANTOSH KUMAR B. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTION IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING ANNEXURE-J, VIZ., ORDER DATED 18.09.2024 DISMISSING THE SAID IA NO.1 U/O 41 RULE 5 R/W U/O 43 RULE 2 AND S. 151 CPC, PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC INDI, IN MA NO.8/2024 AND FURTHER ALLOW THE SAID IA NO.1 U/O 41 RULE R/W 5 R/W U/O 43 RULE 2 AND S. 151 CPC IN MA NO.8/2024, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel for the appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioners are before this court being aggrieved by the order rejecting the application under Order 41 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1674 WP No. 203739 of 2024 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 filed in a miscellaneous appeal, challenging the order granting temporary injunction in favour of the respondents. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that while passing the orders on the application seeking stay, the first appellate court commented on the merits of the case which was not warranted and he would further submit that there is every likelihood that the first appellate court may decide the appeal on merits being influenced by its own observations while disposing of the application for stay. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the observations made in the interim order are perfectly justified as the court was required to assign reasons as to why the petitioners are not entitled to relief of stay which they sought in an application under Order 41 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 5. Admittedly, the appeal is pending consideration and not yet heard on merits. It is well settled principle of law that finding on the interim application should not come in the way of the disposal of the main matter. Thus, the first - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1674 WP No. 203739 of 2024 appellate court shall, notwithstanding with its finding on the application under Order 41 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 decide the appeal on merits objectively without being influenced by the observations made under Order 41 Rule 5 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and shall consider the contentions of both appellants and respondents on merit while deciding the appeal. 6. The appeal shall be decided as expeditiously as possible. 7. It is further made clear that nothing is expressed on the merits of the order passed by the trial court which is under challenge before the first appellate court. 8. All contentions relating to the merits of the order otherwise passed by the trial court are kept open to be adjudicated by the first appellate court. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 21