- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7886 OF 2023 (CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT PILLAMMA SINCE DEAD, LEGAL HEIRS ARE A2 TO A4 2. SRI HANUMANTHAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NO.78, KURUBARA STREET GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099 SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 3. SMT MUNIYAMMA W/O LATE M RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099 SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 4. SRI MAHESH BABU S/O LATE M RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099 SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. P. NARAYANAPPA.,ADV. FOR APPELLANTS.) [V/O DT: 23.11.2024, A2 TO A4 ARE LR's OF DECEASED A1.] Digitally signed by NANDINI B G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 AND: 1. M/S PIONIER PROJECT A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO.48 2ND FLOOR, I STAR BUILDING 100 FEET ROAD, 4TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560034 REP. BY ITS PARTNER, SRI NARENDRA BALAJI AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS S/O LATE M. R. YOGISHWAR REDDY 2. SMT GIRIJAMMA SINCE DEAD, LEGAL HEIRS ARE R3 TO R14 3. SMT G R VARALAKSHMI D/O LATE M RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 4. SMT BEERAMMA D/O SMT G R VARALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 5. SRI SATHISH S/O SMT G R VARALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 6. SRI LOKESH S/O SMT G R VARALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 7. SRI R MUNIRAJU S/O LATE M RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 8. MS GAGANA M D/O SRI R MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 9. MS DEEPA SHREE D/O SRI R MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 10. MS RENUKA D/O LATE M RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 11. SMT PUSHPA K W/O LATE KUMAR AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 12. SRI AMARANARAYANA S/O LATE KUMAR AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 13. SRI RAMESH K S/O LATE KUMAR AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. 14. SRI BHARATH K S/O LATE KUMAR AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS R/AT GATTAHALLI VILLAGE, POST-HUSKURU-560099, SARJAPURA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU DISTRICT, POSTAL PINCODE-560099. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HADI FEBIN, ADV. FOR SRI. V.B. SHIVA KUMAR., ADV. FOR R1, R3 TO R14 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED.) [V/O DT: 23.11.2024, R3 TO R14 ARE LR's OF DECEASED R2.] - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT.13.10.2023 PASSED ON IA NO.1 IN O.S.NO.415/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL, DISMISSING IA NO.1 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT The plaintiffs being unsuccessful in obtaining an order of temporary injunction are before this Court, in this appeal, challenging the order dated 13.10.2023, passed on IA No.1 filed under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the CPC in OS.No.415/2023 passed by the Court of Prl.Senior Civil Judge and JMFC., Anekal. 2. The plaintiffs have filed suit for partition and separate possession by metes and bounds, claiming that the suit properties are ancestral and joint family properties. The Sy.No.36/1 measuring 2 acres 3 guntas is joint family property but the plaintiff No.2 alienated the same in favour of third parties and defendant No.2 to 14 have executed confirmation deed. The plaintiff Nos.3 and 4 have also executed confirmation deed, confirming the said sale deed and also from some of the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 legal heirs of Ramaiah through his wife Girijamma, alienated the Sy.No.31/2013 measuring 2 acres 35 guntas in favour third parties. 3. The G-tree of the family makes out that Ramaiah through his second wife Muniyamma has one son Mahesh Babu, and two daughters namely Shanthakumari and VasanthaKumari. But the said Shanthakumari and Vasanthakumari were not made as parties in the suit. 4. Whether the properties are ancestral property or joint property or absolute property of Ramaiah is to be confirmed during full-fledged trial. But admittedly, the two daughters namely Shanthakumari and VasanthaKumari were not made as parties. 5. Upon considering the same, the defendants have contended that the suit schedule property was absolute property of Ramaiah and as such, after the death of Ramaiah, defendant Nos.2 to 14 being the owners, have alienated the same in their favour. Therefore, considering these facts, the issue involved requires full-fledged trial and at this stage, the plaintiffs have not made out prima-facie case. Therefore, the Trial Court is correct in dismissing the claim of the plaintiffs. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:11719 MFA No. 7886 of 2023 Therefore, there is no need to make interference with the order passed by the Trial Court. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. 6. The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible, for which, both parties shall co- operate with the Court. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32