- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3700 WP No. 107242 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 107242 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. ANANTHA KANDAKURA S/O. YELAGURACHAR KANDAKURA, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE BUSINESS, R/O. C/O. SIDDANA GOWDA COMPLEX, BEHIND HOTEL SANGAM INTERNATIONAL, SVC SCHOOL ROAD, KUSTAGI-583277, DIST: KOPPAL. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.C. JNANAYYASWAMI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. VENUGOPAL S/O. KRISHNAMURTHY @ KRISHNACHAR HALLUR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRI. AND PRIVATE JOB, R/O. FLAT NO.21113, PRESTIGE RIDGE APARTMENTS, HOSKERAHALLI RING ROAD, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-560085. 2. SRI. GURURAJ S/O. KRISHNAMURTHY @ KRISHNACHAR HALLUR, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRI. AND PRIVATE JOB R/O. FLAT NO.E/12/10, PLATINUM CITY, NO.2 HNT FACTORY ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU-560085. 3. SRI. RAVI S/O. KRISHNAMURTHY @ KRISHNACHAR HALLUR, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRI. AND PRIVATE JOB, R/O. KUSTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL AND FLAT NO.E/12/10, ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2025.02.27 17:00:49 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3700 WP No. 107242 of 2024 PLATINUM CITY NO.2 HNT FACTORY ROAD, BENGALURU-560085. 4. SMT. LATHA W/O. L. NARASAPPA, AGE: 61 YEARS, R/O. NO.206, 24TH CROSS , JUDICIAL LAYOUT, GKVK POST, BENGALURU-560065. 5. SMT. GEETHA @ SINDHU W/O. D. GOVIND RAO, D/O . KRISHNAMURTHY @ KRISHNACHAR HALLUR, AGE: 55 YEARS, FLAT NO.E/12/10, PLATINUM CITY, NO.2 HMT FACTORY ROAD, BENGALURU-560085. 6. SMT. KAVITA W/O. VINOD MUTAGIKAR, D/O KRISHNAMURTHY @ KRISHNACHAR HALLUR, AGE: 53 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO.D/9/7, PLATINUM CITY, NO.2 HMT WATCH FACTORY ROAD, BENGALURU-560085. 7. SRI. SACHIDANAND S/O. SHYAMA RAO NADAGOUDA, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SANJEEV NAGAR (EASTERN SIDE), MAHISHI ROAD, MALAMADDI, DHARWAD-580001 AND FLAT NO.E/12/10, PLATINUM CITY NO.2 HNT FACTORY ROAD, BENGALURU-560085. 8. SRI. UDAY @ UDAY KUMAR S/O KALLAPPA NAYAK, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SIDRAMESHWAR NAGAR, MUDHOL, BAGALKOTE. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3700 WP No. 107242 of 2024 9. SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O. YALAGURACHAR KANDAKUR, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SILICON SPLENDOR APARTMENTS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, BESIDE MAYAMMA MALLARAYYA CONVENTION HALL, SNEHA COLONY, CHIKKALASANDRA, BENGALURU-560061. …RESPONDENTS (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED 24.02.2025) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE IN THE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22-08-224 PASSED BY THE PRL. JUDGE FAMILY COURT KOPPAL IN M.A. NO.15/2022 (ARISING OUT OF I.A. NO.1 PASSED IN O.S. NO.398/2020) VIDE ANNEXURE-F, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION IS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Notice to respondents is dispensed with in view of proposed order to be passed. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; (1) Issue in the writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 22-08-224 passed by the Prl. Judge Family Court Koppal in M.A. No.15/2022 (arising out of I.A. No.1 passed in O.S. No.398/2020) vide Annexure-F, in the interest of justice and equity. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3700 WP No. 107242 of 2024 (2) Grant such other reliefs that this Hon’ble Court may deems fit in the circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. 3. Petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.398/2020 before the Senior Civil Judge at Kusthagi seeking for declaration that the Compromise Decree entered into between the defendants and plaintiff is null, void and sham is not binding on the petitioner. In the said suit, an application under order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC had been filed by the petitioner seeking for injunction to stay the operation and implementation of the Compromise Decree. The trial Court had granted an order of injunction, which on appeal, the first appellate Court set aside by its order dated 22.08.2024 in Misc. Appeal No.15/2022. It is challenging the said order, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is a Joint Development Agreement - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3700 WP No. 107242 of 2024 entered into between the petitioner and defendant No.2, who is respondent No.2 herein, who had also a executed power of attorney in favour of the petitioner and as such, the compromise which has been entered into is contrary to the JDA and General Power of Attorney and therefore the injunction order has been sought for. 5. The injunction order being for restraining the operation and implementation of the Compromise Decree, in my considered opinion, is not in furtherance of any final relief. The petitioner’s contention being that there is a Joint Development Agreement, the petitioner has not sought for enforcement of the said Joint Development Agreement, but only relief sought for injunction, which would not enure to the benefit of the parties and without a final relief is being sought for. Such a relief of injunction could not be sought for, as such, I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3700 WP No. 107242 of 2024 trial Court. The petition stands dismissed, at the stage of admission itself. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE CKK CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14