- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1530 RSA No. 200080 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO.200080 OF 2025 (INJ) BETWEEN: G. MALLIKARJUNA S/O LATE G. NARASIMHALU AGE: 58 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS SEIZIN AGENT R/O: H.NO.10-259, MAKTHALPET RAICHUR – 584 101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SACHIN M MAHAJAN,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. LAXMIDEVI W/O LATE G. RAMULU (D/O LATE G. EASHWARAPPA) AGE: 66 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD AND AGRICULTURE R/O: GOPALPET, NARAYANPET, TQ: MAKTHAL, DIST: MAHEBOOB NAGAR TELANGANA – 509 208. PRESENTLY RESIDENT AT ARAVINDA NILAYA, H.NO.10-1-42/1 MAKTHALPET, RAICHUR – 584 101. 2. G. LAXMIDEVI W/O LATE G. YELLAPPA AGE: 57 YEARS, Digitally signed by BASALINGAPPA SHIVARAJ DHUTTARGAON Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1530 RSA No. 200080 of 2025 OCC: HOUSEHOLD R/O: H.NO.10-1-42/1 MAKTHALPET, RAICHUR – 584 101. 3. G. ARAVIND KUMAR S/O LATE G. YELLAPPA AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS R/O: H.NO.10-1-42/1 MAKTHALPET, RAICHUR – 584 101. 4. G.ANUSHA D/O LATE G. YELLAPPA W/O G. CHANDRASHEKHAR AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: BANK EMPLOYEE R/O: KUKKADAPALLY, HYDERABAD. ALSO AT. R/O: H.NO.10-1-42/1 MAKTHALPET, RAICHUR – 584 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI AMEET KUMAR DESHPANDE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI VENKATESH C.MALLABADI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF THE CPC, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.03.2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.-III AT RAICHUR IN O.S.NO.492/2012 AND THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 19.09.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C.-I AT RAICHUR IN R.A.NO.20/2023, ABND DISMISS THE SUIT OF THE PLAINTIFFS BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1530 RSA No. 200080 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This appeal is against the concurrent finding recorded in O.S.No.429/2012 on the file of the Additional Civil Judge, Raichur. The said suit filed seekaing injunction in respect of the property bearing Survey No.564/1, measuring 3 acres, situated at Raichur, is decreed. Thereafter, the defendant filed appeal in R.A.No.20/2023 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge Court, Raichur. The said appeal came to be dismissed. The trial Court had framed issues which are as under: “(i) Whether the plaintiff No.1 proves that, she is in lawful possession and enjoyment of the suit property as on the date of suit? (ii) Whether the plaintiff No.1 proves the alleged interference by the defendant? - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1530 RSA No. 200080 of 2025 (iii) Whether the plaintiff No.1 is entitled for relief as prayed for ? (iv) What order or decree?” 3. The trial Court has concluded that, the plaintiffs are in actual possession, pursuant to a registered partition deed and the settlement deed. The first appellate Court has also concurred with the finding of the trial Court and held that the plaintiffs are in possession pursuant to the registered partition deed and settlement deed produced before the trial Court. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the defendant/appellant would submit that, a comprehensive suit for partition is pending in O.S.No.190/2013 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Raichur and the said suit is filed by the present appellant and his siblings. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that, the finding relating to the validity of the partition and settlement could not have been given in a suit for injunction, more particularly in a situation when the comprehensive suit for partition is pending consideration. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1530 RSA No. 200080 of 2025 5. Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents on the other hand would submit that, the parties have led evidence to support their case relating to the possession based on the settlement deed and the partition deed and the and the competent Court has given finding based on the evidence and no fault can be found in the impugned Judgment and decree passed by the trial Court and the first appellate Court. 6. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the Bar and perused the records. 7. Admitted factual position is a suit for partition in O.S.No.190/2013 is pending on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Raichur. The said suit is filed by the present appellant as well as the siblings of the present appellant who are not parties to this proceedings. Needless to say that, a judgment rendered in this case does not bind the parties to the proceedings before the trial Court who are not parties to the proceeding in this appeal. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1530 RSA No. 200080 of 2025 8. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that, the finding recorded by the trial Court and the first appellate Court based on the registered partition deed and settlement deed need not be interfered in this second appeal, as no substantial question of law would arise. However, it is made clear that, the judgment and decree rendered in this appeal or in the first appeal, as well as by the trial Court, shall not bind the parties who are not parties to this proceeding, or who are not claiming under the parties to this proceeding. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE BL,SVH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43