- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3344 RP No. 612 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH REVIEW PETITION NO. 612 OF 2024 IN MFA NO.4526/2024 (CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. SIDDAPPA S/O. LATE REVANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT BASAVANNANAPALYA SIRA GATE TUMAKURU-572 106. 2. SMT. JAMUNA B., W/O. SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT BASAVANNANAPALYA SIRA GATE TUMAKURU-572 106. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V.B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MS. CHANDANA D/O. REVANNASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT WARD NO.1 GARDEN HOUSE ANTHARASANAHALLI TUMAKURU - 572 106. 2. MS. BHUMIKA R., D/O. REVANNASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3344 RP No. 612 of 2024 R/AT WARD NO.1 GARDEN HOUSE ANTHARASANAHALLI TUMAKURU - 572 106. 3. SRI. RAVANASIDDAPPA S/O. LATE CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT WARD NO.1 GARDEN HOUSE ANTHARASANAHALLI TUMAKURU - 572 106. 4. SMT. RENUKAMMA W/O. REVANNASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT WARD NO.1 GARDEN HOUSE ANTHARASANAHALLI TUMAKURU - 572 106. 5. SMT. CHANDRAKALA R., D/O. REVANNASIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/AT WARD NO.1 GARDEN HOUSE ANTHARASANAHALLI TUMAKURU - 572 106. 6. SRI. M.P. MALLESH S/O. PUTTAMANAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/AT MELEKOTE MAIN ROAD MELEKOTE EXTENSION TUMAKURU - 572 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHANKARNAG B., AND SMT. CHAITRA K.A., ADVOCATES FOR R1 AND R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 08.01.2025, NOTICE TO R3 TO R6 DISPENSED WITH NOTICE ISSUED TO R1 AND R2 ON 30.12.2024, AND R1 AND R2 ARE ORDERED; R1 AND R2 SERVED) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3344 RP No. 612 of 2024 THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED 22.11.2024, PASSED BY THIS HONBLE COURT IN MFA NO.4526/2024, THEREBY RESTORE THE MFA NO.4526/2024, TO HEAR ON MERITS, BY ALLOWING THIS REVIEW PETITION. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER This review petition is filed praying this Court to review the judgment dated 22.11.2024 passed by this Court in M.F.A.No.4526/2024 and thereby, restore M.F.A.No.4526/2024 to hear the same on merits. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that while considering the appeal on merits, this Court made an observation that appellants’ counsel submits that the suit is filed for the relief of specific performance. When the relief is sought, the question of directing both parties temporarily restraining from making alienating does not arise. The Trial Court, instead of passing orders on the merits of the case and without dispensation of notice to the other respondents, has proceeded to pass such an order and hence, the said order requires to be set-aside and directed the Trial Court to dispose - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3344 RP No. 612 of 2024 of the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, within a period of three weeks from today. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that as on the date of passing such order, the said application was not pending and the same was disposed of on 09.09.2024 itself. This Court also made an observation that the impugned order challenged before this Court is a cryptic order and without assigning any reasons, the impugned order has been passed restraining both parties from making an alienation or creating any third party interest. Taking note of the said fact into consideration, set aside the earlier order and directed to dispose of the application within a period of three weeks from that day. 4. In view of the fact that already the application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC has already been considered on merits, the question of issuing such a direction does not arise. Learned counsel for both the parties did not bring it to the Court notice that the application has already been disposed of in the month of September, 2024 itself. Hence, in view of the fact that order has already been passed - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3344 RP No. 612 of 2024 on merits, consideration of miscellaneous first appeal also does not arise and aggrieved party can question the same. Accordingly, this review petition is allowed. MFA No.4526/2024 is restored on file. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56