- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15456 MFA No. 101115 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101115 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. SUNANDA W/O. RAMANNA JANOJI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK & AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAVADI-591240, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.R. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI PARIS SATYAPPA PAWANI, AGE: 78 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SHIROL-587313, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. SMT. RATNAWWA W/O. PARIS PAWANI, AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. SHIROL-587313, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT. 3. SHRI RAMESH S/O. PARISH PAWANI, AGE: 54 YEARS, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15456 MFA No. 101115 of 2025 OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. SHIROL-587313, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT. 4. SHRI LAXMAN S/O. PARIS PAWANI, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. ALAGUR-587301, TQ: JAMKHANDI DIST: BAGALKOT. 5. SHRI MAHAVEER S/O. PARIS PAWANI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE R/O. SHIROL-587313, TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.R. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R5) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 104 READ WITH ORDER 43 RULE 1(R) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS ON I.A-I/2024 DATED 30.01.2025 PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, ATHANI AND TO ALLOW I.A-I/2024 UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 & 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 CPC ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., ATHANI IN O.S.NO.144/2024 WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT AS PRAYED FOR IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15456 MFA No. 101115 of 2025 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri.H.R.Deshpande, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.A.R.Patil, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 5. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Athani (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’ for brevity) on I.A. No.I in O.S. No.144/2024 dated 30.01.2025. 3. The appellant who is the plaintiff to the suit in question filed a petition under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking the Court to grant an order of temporary injunction restraining respondents No.1 and 3 to 5 or anyone claiming under them from alienating the suit properties till the disposal of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15456 MFA No. 101115 of 2025 suit. The Court through the impugned order dismissed the application filed and aggrieved by the decision thus taken, the present appeal is filed. 4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is the daughter of respondents No.1 and 2 and sister of respondents No.3 to 5. They constituted a joint family. The property remains undivided. The appellant being a coparcener is entitled to a share in the suit schedule properties. However, the respondents are trying to alienate the suit properties without her consent and without any partition being effected and therefore, she filed the suit for partition. Learned counsel also submits that though sufficient material was produced to establish her version by the appellant, the trial Court failed to grant the interim order as sought for and therefore, the present appeal is filed. 5. Opposing the submission thus made, learned counsel for respondents submits that the suit properties are - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15456 MFA No. 101115 of 2025 the self acquired properties of respondent No.1 and respondents No.3 to 5. No material whatsoever was produced to show that the suit properties are joint family properties. Learned counsel also contends that by the documents produced by the appellant herself, it is abundantly clear that the suit properties were purchased by respondent No.1 and respondents No.3 to 5 through their individual funds. Learned counsel submits that the trial Court having perceived absence of any material in support of her contention, the petition was rightly dismissed and therefore, the present appeal is not maintainable. 6. On hearing the submission thus made, learned counsel for the appellant states that in case respondents No.1 and 3 to 5 alienate the suit properties, the appellant would be put to serious hardship and therefore, no further orders in this appeal are required except to direct the trial Court to dispose of the suit itself expeditiously. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15456 MFA No. 101115 of 2025 7. Having considered the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel who represents the respondents and as the ultimate relief that is sought for by the appellant is expeditious disposal of the suit itself, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The order of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Athani on I.A. No.I in O.S. No.144/2024 dated 30.01.2025 is confirmed. (ii) However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40