- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI WRIT PETITION NO. 1926 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. RAGI BANGARAIAH, S/O RAGI OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, 2. RAGI PAPAIAH, S/O RAGI OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, 3. RAGI OBAIAH, S/O RAGI OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 4. B.OBAIAH S/O BANGARI BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 5. BANGARI BORAIAH, S/O BANGARI BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, 6. RADHAKRISHNAPPA, S/O BANGARI BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 7. NAGABHUSHANA @ B.NAGABORAIAH, S/O BANGARI BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 8. DODDA BORAIAH, S/O SANNA BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, 9. RAGI PAPAIAH, S/O SANNA BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, 10. KIVUDU BORAIAH, S/O KIVUDU BANGARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, 11. KURI BORAIAH, S/O KURI SANNA PAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, 12. BANGARAIH, S/O KURI SANNA PAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 13. KRISHNAIAH S/O KURI BORAIAH AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS 14. BANGARAIAH, S/O KURI SANNA BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, 15. KURI PAPAIAH, S/O LATE BANGARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 16. K.PAPAIAH, S/O KURI SANNA PAPAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS R/O PELURAHATTI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF HAIKAL, BELAGATTA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHITRADURGA TALUK-577 526. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT.K.TEJASWINI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.B.M.SIDDAPPA) AND: 1. B.BORAIAH, S/O BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 2. VENKATESH, S/O B.OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, 3. BANGARAIAH, S/O DORE BORAIAH, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 4. B.BORAIAH, S/O BANGARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, 5. B.RAGHU, S/O BANGARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 6. B.S.BANGARAIAHA, S/O SANNA OBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS R/O PELURAHATTU VILLAGE, HAMLET OF HAIKAL VILLAGE , BELAGATA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, TURUVANURU HOBALI, CHITRADURGA TALUK-577 526. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO (A) QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED 2ND ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC CHITRADURGA IN OS NO.174/2019 ON 25/09/2019 IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-E TO THE WRIT PETITION AND PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM CHITRADURGA IN MA.22/2019 DATED 23/11/2022 IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE- G TO THE WRIT PETITION. (B) GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS NOT TO OBSTRUCT PERFORMING THE POOJA TO GODDESS KENCHAMBADEVI SITUATED PELURAHATTY VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK BY THE PETITIONERS PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 2. This petition seeks to challenge an order dated 25.09.2019 passed by the II Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Chitradurga in OS.No.174/2019 as well as an order dated 23.11.2022 passed in M.A.No.22/2019 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M, Chitradurga. 3. It appears that the plaintiffs/petitioners as well as others who were arrayed in the suit filed in OS.No.9/2019, in which, the plaintiffs claimed possession and custody of the impugned properties and money offered by the devotees as well as the pooja of goddess Kenchamba Devi whose temple was made in the Peralarhatty Village. The plaintiff No.5 claimed to be the archaka. A relief of permanent injunction has been sought against the defendants from obstructing or preventing or including the plaintiffs from worshipping the goddess Kenchamba Devi and from participating in Jatra functions and from taking income and expenditure statements of Kenchamba Devi temple office. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 4. A written statement was filed by the defendants in which the claim of the plaintiffs were denied and it was stated that though they are successors of common ancestors, however, it is the defendants who had the right of pooja and are entitled to receive the offerings of the devotees who visit the temple. 5. An application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC was filed by the plaintiffs seeking a temporary injunction. The application was rejected on the ground that there were no documentary records filed by the plaintiffs to demonstrate their right. It was further observed that, grant of temporary injunction would depend on the type of evidence that is led by the parties at the appropriate stage and therefore, neither of the aspects of prime facie case, balance of convenience or irreparable injury, existed in favour of the plaintiffs and therefore, the I.A. was rejected. 6. An appeal was filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 read with Section 104 of CPC by the plaintiffs which came - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 to be dismissed by means of the impugned order dated 23.11.2022. 7. The Appellate Court noticed that the defendant No.4 who only had filed the written statement and also filed objections to the I.A., had admitted the relationship between the parties as well as the existence of goddess Kenchamba Devi in Perlarahatti Village, but he denied that the plaintiffs had joint right to worship of goddess Kenchamba Devi and also denied that they have joint right to celebrate and participate in Jatra function of the said goddess. It was denied that the plaintiff No.5 was appointed as archaka of the said goddess and that he was performing the pooja of the said goddess on every Tuesday and Friday. But plaintiff No.5 is acting as archaka in the Jatra function was also denied. Other allegations made in the plaint was also denied in the written statement. 8. Given the fact that the plaintiffs had not produced any documentary proof that they have the right - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 of worship of the goddess as claimed by them and have not produced any documents to show that the plaintiff No.5 is appointed as archaka of the said goddess and that he had movable properties belonging to the goddess and no material was shown that they had joint right to worship the goddess. The appeal of the plaintiffs/petitioners was dismissed. 9. The Appellate Court noticed that the plaintiff even at the stage of appeal had not produced any scrap of paper to show the right of worship to the goddess. It was opined by the Court that unless the documentary evidence is produced by the plaintiffs to show that prima facie, they also have a joint right, such claim, which is not supported by any documentary evidence, is not sufficient to make out a prima facie case in favour of the plaintiff. 10. I find no error or illegality in the order passed by the Courts. The orders passed are justifiable given the fact that no documentary evidence has been filed to substantiate any of the allegations made in it. It is only - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38375 WP No. 1926 of 2023 after recording of evidence that the Court can come to a conclusion as to the entitlement of a party. In view of the aforesaid, I find no merit in this petition and the petition is accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (JAYANT BANERJI) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1