- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33944 RSA No. 1760 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL NO. 1760 OF 2022 (INJ) BETWEEN: SRI VENKATACHALAPATHI S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT SEETHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE LAKKUR HOBLI MALUR TALUK-563 130 …APPELLANT (BY SRI RAMAIAH GOWDA L M, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI N SURESH S/O NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS R/AT SEETHANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE LAKKUR HOBLI MALUR TALUK-563 130 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI SUDHINDRA S A, ADVOCATE C/R) THIS RSA FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.08.2022 PASSED IN R.A.No.86/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MALUR DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND THE CONFIRMING JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 23.09.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.462/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MALUR. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33944 RSA No. 1760 of 2022 ORAL ORDER After addressing the arguments for sometime, counsel for the appellant files a memo, which reads as under: “The appellant seek leave of this Hon’ble Court to file the appropriate suit against the respondent in respect of suit property as the appellant’s property is differ from respondent property, to meet the ends of justice.” 2. Placing the memo on record, appeal stands dismissed. 3. However, it is observed that if the appellant succeeds in a comprehensive suit to be filed by the appellant, the present decree of injunction would be subservient to such decree to be passed in the comprehensive suit. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR