- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100332 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: ISHWARGOUDA S/O RENUKAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: TOTAGANTI, TQ: GAJENDRAGAD-582 114, DIST: GADAG. … APPELLANT (BY SMT. PADMAJA S. TADAPATRI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RENUKANGOUDA S/O GOUDAPPAGODA PATIL, AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: TOTAGANTI, TQ: GAJENDRAGAD-582 114, DIST: GADAG. 2. SMT. AKKAMAHADEVI S/O RENUKAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 73 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O: TOTAGANTI, TQ: GAJENDRAGAD-582 114, DIST: GADAG. 3. UMESHGOUDA S/O RENUKAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: TOTAGANTI, TQ: GAJENDRAGAD-582 114, DIST: GADAG. 4. SMT. SARASWATI W/O SHANKAR CHIIKAVOTAGERI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: TOTAGANTI, TQ: GAJENDRAGAD-582 114, DIST: GADAG. 5. SARENTICA RENEWABLE INDIA-3 LTD., (PAN NO.ABHC 89017N), REP. BY BALAJI S/O RANGARAM, AGE: 51 YEARS, R/O: NO.H.22 SRIRANG, Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 5TH CROSS, TELECOM COLONY, MAIN ROAD, OPP. JEEVANADI SAMPURN APARTMENT, GANESH NAGAR, KODIGE HALLI, VIDYARANYAPUR, BENGALURU-560 097. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHIVAPRASAD SHANTANAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1 R/W SECTION 104 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 17.12.2024 PASSED IN OS NO.438/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, RON ON IA NO.1 AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE IA NO.1 UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) This appeal is filed by the plaintiff, questioning the order dated 17.12.2024, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ron, in O.S.No.438/2023, on I.A.No.1 filed under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, thereby, the prayer for the relief of temporary injunction is dismissed. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsels appearing for both the sides and perused the material placed before the Court. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 3. For the purpose of convenience and easy reference, ranking of the parties is referred to as per their status before the trial Court. 4. The plaintiff has filed a suit for partition and separate possession by metes and bounds contending that the suit schedule properties are the ancestral and joint family properties by claiming 1/4th share in all the suit schedule properties. The plaintiff is the son of defendants No.1 and 2. 5. Further, the plaintiff pleaded that the defendant No.3, his wife along with minor children have entered into agreement of sale dated 05.04.2023 in respect of 01 acre of land in Sy.No.484/1+2 out of total extent of 05 acres 27 guntas. Further, defendant No.3, his wife along with minor children have executed an agreement of lease for 04 acres 15 guntas in the said land. Therefore, pleaded that when the plaintiff is having inherent right of share of 1/4th in the suit schedule properties, therefore, filed a suit - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 for partition and also filed an application for temporary injunction in respect of land bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 not to change the nature of land. 6. Though initially the trial Court has granted an ex-parte order of temporary injunction, but subsequently upon hearing both the parties, the trial Court has dismissed I.A.No.1 and an ex-parte order of injunction granted was vacated. Being aggrieved by this, the plaintiff has preferred the present appeal. 7. The grounds urged and the learned counsel for plaintiff submitted that all the suit schedule properties including Sy.No.484/1+2 are ancestral and joint family properties. Whatever agreement of sale between defendant No.3, his wife and two minor children with defendant No.5 is not binding on the share of plaintiff. Therefore, submitted that if defendant No.3 is going to install the project, then it would decline the valuable right of other properties more particularly the portion of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 land bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 which cause deprivation of legitimate right of the plaintiff. Therefore, prays for grant of order of temporary injunction. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent/defendant No.5 submitted that defendants No.3, his wife along with minor children after understanding that defendant No.5 is going to install wind power project on the land bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 to the extent of 05 acres 27 guntas and accordingly an agreement of sale was executed in respect of 01 acre of land and agreement of lease was executed for remaining 04 acres 15 guntas of land. Therefore, further submitted that the Government of Karnataka has given permission to defendant No.5 for installation of wind power project and accordingly agreement of sale and agreement of lease were executed and when this being the fact, when the plaintiff is claiming 1/4th share in the other properties, and the land as per lease agreement is only a small extent and for this, the entire project cannot be prevented. Also - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 submitted that in clause (8) and (9) of agreement of sale, defendants No.3, his wife along with minor children being vendors have specifically agreed for carrying out necessary sketch, soil testing, topography work and rerouting before making installation of the power project and now the plaintiff cannot file application for injunction prohibiting defendant No.5 to carryout the project. Further submitted that as per section 20A and section 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the Courts cannot grant injunction in respect of the projects of infrastructure as specified in the schedule of the Act. Therefore, this is correctly observed by the trial Court and refused grant of temporary injunction, which needs no interference. Therefore, prays to dismiss the appeal. 9. Upon hearing the arguments, the point that arises for consideration in this appeal is as under: “Whether, under the facts and circumstances involved in this case, when defendants No.3, his wife along with minor - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 children being owners/vendors have agreed with defendant No.5 by executing agreement of sale and also agreement of lease, for installation of wind power project on the land bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 to the extent of 01 acre and 04 acres 15 guntas, then an order of temporary injunction could be passed by considering section 20A and Section 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act?” 10. Defendant No.5 has not disputed the relationship of plaintiff with defendants No.3. The application filed for temporary injunction is only confined to item No.1 of the suit schedule properties bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 to the extent of 05 acres 27 guntas. It is not disputed that defendants No.3, his wife along with minor children have executed an agreement of sale in favour of defendant No.5 for sale of 01 acre of land and also executed an agreement of lease in respect of 04 acres 15 guntas in the land bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 out of total extent of 05 acres 27 guntas. The plaintiff has filed application for temporary injunction only in respect of land - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 bearing Sy.No.484/1+2 measuring 05 acres 27 guntas seeking an order of temporary injunction against defendant No.5 not to install and proceed with wind power project by changing the nature of land. 11. The trial Court has observed in the order that if the suit is decreed, at the most the plaintiff will get 1/4th of total extent, in such circumstances if at all the plaintiff succeeds in getting share in the suit schedule properties, he can work out his remedy in final decree proceedings, but could not prevent the wind power project to be installed by defendant No.5. Also assigned reasons that as per Section 20A and Section 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act, the Court cannot grant injunction in respect of the infrastructure issues, thus, dismissed the application. 12. Agreement of sale is registered one without possession. Though the agreement of sale is without possession, since defendant No.5 is going to install wind power project, for which defendant No.5 has obtained - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 permission from the Government of Karnataka, which is pleaded in the written statement and produced as document No.1. Therefore, the Government of Karnataka issued permission and necessary orders to defendant No.5 to install the wind power project. 13. Further, a copy of agreement of sale dated 05.04.2023 is made available to this Court at this stage and at paragraph Nos.8 and 9, which reads as follows: “8. The vendor hereby agrees and confirms that the Vendee or its nominee/s and/or prospective purchasers can carry out field works as and whenever required including, but not limited to, soil testing study, preliminary level studies, demarcation of the land by way of yellow painted pillar for topo study and finalization of layout of the wind project, undertake re-routing of distribution lines, topographical study in the schedule Property and undertake to provide free and unfettered access, to the Vendee or its nominees, prospective purchasers and/or their representatives, to the Schedule Property in order to carry out the required activities as mentioned above. The Vendor clearly understands and agrees that for conducting field activities including the soil testing study the Vendee’s representatives has to be physically present on the Schedule Property for such period as may be communicated by the Vendee to the Vendor either orally or in writing. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 9. The vendor understands that the Vendee shall get the existing power transmission or power distribution lines, if any, which are passing through the Schedule Property, re-routed in such a way that no part of the power transmission or power distribution lines shall pass through the Schedule Property by duly following the laid down procedure, rules and regulations, and after securing the required permits and approvals. The vendor undertake to provide free access, to the Vendee or its nominees and /or representatives, to the Schedule Property in order to carry out the required activities as mentioned above.” 14. Though the agreement of sale is without possession and is registered one, but as per the clauses above stated, defendant No.3, his wife along with minor children being vendors, have agreed and confirmed that defendant No.5 can carry out field works such as soil testing study, preliminary level studies, demarcation of the land by way of yellow painted pillar for topo study and finalization of layout of the wind project, undertake re- routing of distribution lines, topographical study etc. Also, defendant Nos.3, his wife along with minor children have agreed and confirmed that defendant No.5 shall get the existing power transmission of power distribution lines, if any which are passing through schedule property. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 Therefore, defendant No.3, his wife along with minor children have agreed and confirmed in the said agreement of sale and the same is also found in the lease agreement that defendant No.5 shall make the necessary works before installation of the wind power instruments. 15. When this being the fact emerged as per the pleadings of both the parties supported with prima facie materials, therefore, as per Section 20A and 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act, an order of temporary injunction cannot be granted. In this regard, the Trial Court has correctly observed and declined to grant an order of temporary injunction. Accordingly, I answer point No.(i) in the Negative. 16. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is dismissed. ii) The order dated 17.12.2024, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ron, in O.S.No.438/2023, on I.A.No.1 filed under - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8214 MFA No. 100332 of 2025 Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of CPC is hereby confirmed. iii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE SRA CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 22