SMT. RATANAVVA ALIAS RATNA W/O BASAVANNEPPA TAVERAGI v. BASAVANNEPPA S/O NAGAPPA TAVERAGI
WP/105460/2025 · 2025-08-20
Suraj Govindaraj
Original Suitbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 60970 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 60970 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10550 WP No. 105460 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO. 105460 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SMT. RATANAVVA @ RATNA W/O. BASAVANNEPPA TAVERAGI, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KODIHALLI, TQ. HIREKERUR, DIST. HAVERI, NOW RESIDING AT KULAGERI-587155, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. S G KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
BASAVANNEPPA S/O. NAGAPPA TAVERAGI, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE AND PENSIONER, R/O. KODIHALLI VILLAGE 581111, TQ. HIREKERUR, DIST. HAVERI. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO,A) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI FOR QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 24.06.2025 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIREKERUR, IN MA NO. 3/2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-K, BY CONFIRMING THE ORDER DATED 04.12.2020 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HIREKERUR ON IA NO. I IN O.S. NO.245/2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-J BY ALLOWING THIS
Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10550 WP No. 105460 of 2025
WRIT PETITION IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.B) PASS SUCH OTHER SUITABLE ORDER/S AS THIS HON BLE COURT DEEM FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.INTERIM PRAYERPENDING FINAL DISPOSAL OF THE ABOVE WRIT PETITION THE PETITIONER MOST HUMBLE PRAY THAT THIS HON BLE COURT MAY KINDLY BE PLEASED TO RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENT NOT TO ALIENATE THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES DURING PENDENCY OF THE WRIT PETITION IN O.S.NO.245/2018 PENDING ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HIREKERUR IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 24.06.2025 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hirekerur, in MA No. 3/2021 vide ANNEXURE-K, by confirming the
order dated 04.12.2020 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC Hirekerur on IA No. I in O.S. No.245/2018 vide Annexure-J by allowing this writ petition in the ends of justice and equity.
b) Pass such other suitable order/s as this Hon’ble court deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The petitioner had filed a suit in O.S. No. 245 of 2018 before Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Hirekerur,
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10550 WP No. 105460 of 2025
seeking the award of maintenance of ₹30,000/- per month as also for the creation of a charge on the maintenance amount.
3. In the said suit, the petitioner-wife had filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 R/w. Section 151 of CPC seeking an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendant-husband from alienating the suit schedule property. The said application was dismissed by order dated 04.11.2020. Challenging the same, M.A. No.3 of 2021 came to be filed, which also came to be dismissed vide order dated
24.06.2025. Challenging the same
order, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. The suit being one for maintenance, and the maintenance amount not having been crystallised and ordered, the question of any injunction being granted restraining the defendant-husband from alienating a property would not be permissible,
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10550 WP No. 105460 of 2025
inasmuch as the petitioner-wife has no vested interest in the said property until the crystallisation of her rights.
5. Be that as it may, even if any alienation were to take place, and a charge were to be created by the court in respect of the maintenance amounts due, the same could always apply to the property alienated, since any such sale during the subsistence of the suit, would be subject to Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act which would apply.
6. In that view of the matter, I do not find any infirmity in the order dated 04.11.2020 passed in O.S. No. 245 of 2018 or in the order dated 24.06.2025 in M.A. No. 3 of 2021.
7. The matter now being at the stage of cross- examination of the plaintiff, and considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial court
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10550 WP No. 105460 of 2025
for expeditious disposal of the suit, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE
Vb Ct:pa List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37