- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25155 MFA No. 5365 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5365 OF 2019 (CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. T.P. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE PREMACHANDRA RAO AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.45, 6TH BLOCK 1ST MAIN, BEL LAYOUT VIDYARANYAPURA BENGALURU-560 097 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. BHANU PRASAD K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. C.J. NAGABUSHANA S/O LATE C.N.JEEVANA RAO AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS R/AT NO.2154, EAST END 'C' MAIN, 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560 069 2. C.J. RAGHAVENDRA RAO S/O LATE C.J. JEEVANA RAO AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/O NO.14311, VILLAGE BIRCH STREET, HOUSTON TEAXAS-77062, U.S.A 3. SRI. U. VISHNU MOHAN S/O LATE C.N. JEEVANA RAO Digitally signed by ANJALI M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25155 MFA No. 5365 of 2019 AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/O NO.11338, DUQUESNE AVENUE NAPERVILLE ILLINOIS - 60565 U.S.A. 4. SRI. ANAND PRAMODH S/O SRI. ANAND RAO AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/O NO. E-3, VINAYAKA RESIDENCY 5TH CROSS, GANESHA BLOCK R.T.NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 032 5. SRI. R.J. ASHOK KUMAR S/O LATE IJEWANTHA RAJ AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O NO.10, 1ST CROSS ROBERTSONPET K.G.F. -563 122 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.A.H. RAZVI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R5; NOTICE TO R1-R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 05.08.2019) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 07.6.2019 PASSED ON I.A.NO.1 IN OS.NO.5714/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXVII CITY CIVIL JUDGE [CCH-38], BENGALURU, REJECTING THE IA.NO.I FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULES 1 & 2 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25155 MFA No. 5365 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard both the counsels at length. 2. It is the apprehension of the appellant that respondent No.5, who is now the purchaser of the schedule property may alienate the schedule property and if respondent No.5 alienates the schedule property, the very purpose of the suit would be frustrated. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.5 fairly submits that, respondent No.5 undertakes not to alienate the schedule property till disposal of the suit in O.S.No.5714/2018. 4. Further it is submitted that, now respondent No.5 has undertaken construction work and the plaintiff shall not object for the same. Any construction undertaken by respondent No.5 during the pendency of the suit is subject to result of the suit and in case plaintiff succeeds, respondent No.5 shall not claim any equity. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25155 MFA No. 5365 of 2019 5. In view of the fair submission of both the side, this appeal is disposed of placing the undertaking of the respondent No.5 on record. 6. It is also made clear that, respondent No.5 is permitted to go on with the construction work undertaken by him. The said construction would be subject to result of the suit. In case plaintiff succeeds, respondent No.5 shall not seek any equity. 7. The learned Trial Court is requested to dispose of the suit expeditiously. Both the parties shall co- operate for early disposal, without seeking any unnecessary adjournment. Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20