Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41307 (KAR)

SMT. VASANTHA v. SMT. LATHA

WP/14522/2024 · 2025-09-02

M Nagaprasanna

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 14522 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. VASANTHA D/O LATE SUBBEGOWDA W/O VENKATESHA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS (DRIVER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT) GUEST HOUSE, YADIYURU KUNIGAL TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 130. 2. SMT.SAVITHA D/O LATE SUBBEGOWDA W/O MANJUNATHA C/O VENKATESHA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS (DRIVER, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT) GUEST HOUSE, YADIYURU KUNIGAL TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT – 572 130. 3. SRI RANGEGOWDA @ RANGASWAMY S/O LATE SUBBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDENT OF CHIGALLY POST AND VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 AND DISTRICT – 573 201. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI BALARAJ A.C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. LATHA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS D/O NINGEGOWDA, W/O RAVI R/O KAREKERE VILLAGE SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 201. 2. SMT.RENUKA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS D/O NINGEGOWDA W/O SRINIVASA R/O AMBUGA POST AND VILLAGE SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 201. 3. KUM.CHARITHA AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS D/O B.N.SATHYA AND LATE REVUKA @ SAVITHRI BEING A MIONR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN B.N.SATHYA, R/O KINDIPURA NANHEDEVARA KAVALU HASSAN KASABA HASSAN TALUK – 573 201. 4. SRI C.N.RAMACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 S/O NINGEGOWDA R/O CHIGALLY POST AND VILLAGE SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 201. 5. SRI MANJUNATHA T.K., @ RANGASWAMY S/O KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS SENIOR MANAGER R/O KARNATAKA BANK @ 1715/20, JAYAMAHAL, 7TH CROSS RAJAKEMPEGOWDA EXTENSION CHANNAPATNA – 562 160. 6. SMT.PREMA T.K., D/O KALEGOWDA W/O PRABHAKARA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/O NO.42, THAMMANNA 9TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE SAINAGARA LAYOUT VIDHYARANYAPURA POST HESARGHATTA MAIN ROAD M.S.PALYA, BENGALURU – 560 097. 7. SMT.DEVIKA T.K., @ JAYASRI, D/O KALEGOWDA W/O DHANAYAJA G.P. AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/O BEHIND GANAPATHI TEMPLE RIGHT SIDE 2ND CROSS NEW SIDDAPURA BHADRAVATHI – 577 301. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 8. SRI SHIVAKUMAR T.K. @ HARISHA S/O KALEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS RESIDENT OF MURALI NILAYA OSM RAOD, 3RD CROSS ROAD BHUTHANAGUDI BHADRAVATHI – 577 301. 9. SRI SANNEGOWDA S/O NARASIMHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS RESIDENT OF CHIGALLY POST AND VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 201. 10. BHAGYA D/O LATE SUBBEGOWDA W/O LATE KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS 11. SINCHANA D/O LATE KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS 12. DARSHA GOWDA S/O LATE KRISHNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS RESPONDENT NOS.11 AND 12 BEING MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER, SMT.BHAGYA RESPONDENTS 10 TO 12 ARE - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 RESIDENTS OF CHIGALLY POST AND VILLAGE SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT – 573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R4) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED 5TH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN MA NO. 7 OF 2024 DT. 19/04/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND TO CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN ON I.A.NO.II IN OS NO. 262 OF 2023 DT. 17/02/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-H; ii) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED 5TH ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN IN MA NO. 7 OF 2024 DT. 19/04/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND TO REMAND THE ABOVE APPEAL FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION BY PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 TO CONTEST THE ABOVE MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL ON MERITS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Petitioners/defendants 1 to 3 are before this Court calling in question an order of the First Appellate Court, by which the order refusing to grant injunction is upturned and an injunction is granted in favour of the respondent/plaintiffs. 2. Heard Sri Balaraj A C, learned counsel appearing for petitioners and Sri N Shivakumar, learned counsel appearing for caveator/respondent No.4. 3. The suit is one for partition, instituted in OS No. 262 of 2023. An application is filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 by the 4th plaintiff/4th respondent herein seeking an order, of temporary injunction, which is not answered by the concerned court, which leads the plaintiffs 1 to 4 to the first appellate Court. The first appellate Court has granted an order of injunction, against which the petitioners are before this court. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 4. The issue in the lis revolves round a claim for compensation of the alleged joint family property, which is now to acquired. The learned counsel appearing for the plaintiffs submits that the petitioners have already withdrawn 99% of the entire amount of compensation, that is received and have left pittance of ₹2,00,000 in the account. Therefore, an order, to withdraw the remaining said ₹2,00,000 must be granted. 5. The submission of the learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs merit acceptance. The petitioners shall not withdraw the remaining amount that has come out as compensation of the land acquired. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that he must be permitted to file proceedings before the appropriate fora seeking enhancement of the compensation. 7. The parties are directed to maintain status quo till the disposal of the suit. The pendency of the suit or the order now directing to maintain status quo, will not come in the way of the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34324 WP No. 14522 of 2024 both the parties seeking enhancement of compensation, if they are so entitled in law. However, the enhanced compensation, if determined at a later point in time, shall not be withdrawn without the leave of the concerned Civil Court with the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 13