- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14926 RFA No. 2882 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2897 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2882 OF 2024 (INJ) C/W REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 2897 OF 2024 (INJ) IN RFA No. 2882/2024 BETWEEN: 1. MALLESHA GOWDA AGE 64 YEARS (DOB 02-07-1960), SON OF MALLEGOWDA, 2. SMT. SUSHEELA, AGE 58 YEARS (DOB 01-02-1966), WIFE OF MALLESH GOWDA, BOTH ARE RESIDING PRESENTLY AT 2447/B, 17TH MAIN, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 011 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S.PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA DESAI RAMRAO, ADVOCATE) AND: GOUTHAM G. T. AGE MAJOR, SON OF G.V. THIMMAIAH, RESIDING AT NO. 42, H.B.R. LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, TEACHERS COLONY, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 043 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.NEHRU, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14926 RFA No. 2882 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2897 of 2024 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 R/W SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.08.2024 PASSED IN O.S.NO.4858/2020 ON THE FILE OF XXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU., DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION. IN RFA NO. 2897/2024 BETWEEN: 1. MALLESHA GOWDA, AGED 64 YEARS (DOB: 02.07.1960) S/O MALLEGOWDA 2. SMT. SUSHEELA, AGE 58 YEARS (DOB: 01.02.1966) W/O MALLESH GOWDA, BOTH ARE RESIDING PRESENTLY AT 2447/B 17TH MAIN, KUMARASWSAMY LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 011. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCAET FOR SRI. RAGHAVENDRA DESAI RAMRAO, ADVOCATE) AND: MANJUNATH G. T. AGE MAJOR, S/O G.V. THIMMAIAH, RESIDING AT NO.42, HBR LAYOUT, 1ST STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, TEACHERS COLONY, KALYAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 043. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P. NEHRU, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 1 R/W SEC.96 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND DECREE DATED 14.08.2024 PASSED IN OS NO.4873/2020 ON THE FILE OF XXIV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU, DECREEING THE SUIT FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14926 RFA No. 2882 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2897 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT RFA No.2882/2024 is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 14.08.2024 passed in O.S.No.4858/2020 by the XXIV Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, whereby the said suit filed by the respondent – plaintiff against the appellants – defendants for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property was decreed in his favour against the appellants – defendants by the trial court. 2. RFA No.2897/2024 is directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 14.08.2024 passed in O.S.No.4873/2020 by the XXIV Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore, whereby the said suit filed by the respondent – plaintiff against the appellants – defendants for permanent injunction and other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule immovable property was decreed in his favour against the appellants – defendants by the trial court. 3. It is a matter of record and an undisputed fact that the appellants – defendants in both the aforesaid suits are one and the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14926 RFA No. 2882 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2897 of 2024 same, while, the respondents – plaintiffs in both the suits are none other than the brothers. It is also not in dispute that while O.S.No.4858/2020 relates to the western portion of the suit schedule property bearing No.158, khata No.158/674/1, 1st stage, II Block, Kacharnakanahalli, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore, O.S.No.4873/2020 pertains to the Eastern portion of the same property. 4. Since common questions of law and fact arise for consideration in the both the appeals, they are taken up together for consideration and disposed of by this common judgment. 5. Heard learned Senior counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 6. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the appeals and referring to the material on record, learned Senior counsel for the appellants submits that the trial court has failed to consider and appreciate the material on record in their proper perspective and has erroneously decreed the suits filed by the respondents – plaintiffs against the appellants – defendants by improper and erroneous appreciation of the material on record. It is - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14926 RFA No. 2882 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2897 of 2024 submitted that the appellants intend to produce additional evidence in support of their defence and as such, the impugned judgments and decrees may be set aside and the matters remitted back to the trial court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents on instructions submits that he has no objection for the impugned judgments and decrees to be set aside and the matters remitted back to the trial court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by leaving open all contentions and directing the trial court to dispose of the suits by consolidating and clubbing both the aforesaid suits as expeditiously as possible. 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the joint submissions made by both sides, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned judgments and decrees and remit the matters back to the trial court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law by issuing certain directions. 9. In the result, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Both RFA No.2882/2024 and RFA No.2897/2024 are hereby allowed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14926 RFA No. 2882 of 2024 C/W RFA No. 2897 of 2024 (ii) The impugned judgments and decrees dated 14.08.2024 passed in O.S.No.4858/2020 and O.S.No.4873/2020 by the trial court are hereby set aside. (iii) Both the matters are remitted back to the Trial Court for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) Both parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 09.06.2025 without awaiting further notice. (v) The trial court shall consolidate, club and dispose of both the aforesaid suits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. (vi) Liberty is reserved in favour of both the parties to adduce additional oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective claims. (vi) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE BMC/SRL List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8