- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2866 WP No. 104388 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI WRIT PETITION NO. 104388 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. TATYASO @ TATYASAHEB S/O LAXMAN KHOT, AGE. 64 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE, HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 2. SRI. ANNASAHEB S/O LAXMAN KHOT AGE. 66 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 3. SRI. SHANTINATH S/O LAXMAN KHOT AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 4. SRI RAJENDRA S/O APPASAHEB KHOT AGE. 40 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SRINAND A PACHHAPURE, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. MADHUKAR BALU @ BABU KHOT AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2866 WP No. 104388 of 2022 R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 2. SRI. ASHOK S/O BALU @ BABU KHOT AGE. 65 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 3. SRI CHAANDRAKANT BALU @ BABU KHOT AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 4. SRI MAHADEV BALU @ BABU KHOT AGE. 58 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 5. SRI ARVIND @ BALU S/O ASHOK KHOT AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. 6. SRI PRADIP @ BALU S/O SHRIKANT KHOT AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. MUNUCHIWADI VILLAGE HAMLET OF KHADAKLAT, TQ. NIPANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591237. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANGRAM S KULKARNI, ADV FOR R3 & R4, NOTICE TO R1, R2, R5 & R6 ARE SERVED) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2866 WP No. 104388 of 2022 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA., PRAYING TO A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 12/09/2022 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC NIPANI ON I.A. NO. III FILED UNDER SECTION 94 R/W SECTION 151 OF CPC IN M.A. NO. 4/2022 MARKED AT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRL. HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, challenging the order on I.A.III dated 12.9.2022 in M.A. No.4/2022, passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nippani. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this writ petition, are as follows : The petitioners filed a suit, against the respondents for the relief of permanent injunction in O.S.No.51/2022 on the file of learned Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nippani. In the said suit, the petitioners filed an application in I.A.I for the relief of temporary injunction. The respondents filed the written statement and objections to I.A.I. The trial Court, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2866 WP No. 104388 of 2022 vide order 22.3.2022, allowed I.A.I. The respondents aggrieved by the order on I.A.I preferred an appeal in M.A.No.4/2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Nippani. Again, the petitioners filed I.A.III for extension of order of temporary injunction granted in I.A.I. The same was allowed vide order 24.6.2022. Respondents filed an application under Section 94 of the CPC to call for the trial Court records, in O.S.No.51/2022 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Nippani, on the ground that the records are necessary for deciding the appeal. The said application was opposed by the petitioners on the ground that the respondents filed the application with an intention to protract the proceedings. Hence, prayed to dismiss the application. The trial Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties allowed the application and office was directed to call for the trial Court records. The petitioners, aggrieved by the order on I.A.III, filed this writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2866 WP No. 104388 of 2022 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the documents were produced by the parties. The Appellate court could have disposed of the appeal based on the certified copies of the documents produced by the parties. On the contrary, the trial Court committed an error in calling the trial Court records. He submits that by calling the records, there will be delay in the trial. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition. 5. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. Admittedly, plaintiffs have filed a suit against the respondents in O.S.No.51/2022 for the relief of permanent injunction. In the said suit, the petitioners filed an application seeking for an order of temporary injunction. The said application was opposed by the respondents. The trial Court allowed I.A.I and granted an order of temporary injunction for a limited period. The petitioners went on filing application after application for extension of interim order. The respondents aggrieved by the order passed on - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2866 WP No. 104388 of 2022 I.A.I filed an appeal in MFA No.4/2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nippani. The respondents filed I.A.III to call for the trial Court records on the ground that the petitioners and respondents filed several documents which are necessary for the purpose of deciding the dispute. The Appellate Court has called for the trial Court records to satisfy itself in regard to the records produced by the parties. Merely calling for records is no ground to challenge the said order. I do not find any error in the impugned order or any grounds to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following : ORDER Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE rs CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37