- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29531 M.F.A. No.8344/2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8344/2024 (CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MANJUNATHA S/O KANTHARAJU @ KANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. 2. SRI. HARISHKUMAR .K S/O KANTHARAJU @ KANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT HOSAHUDYA VILLAGE VIJAYAPURA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SURESH D. DESHPANDE, ADV.,) AND: 1. SMT. JAYAMMA W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS. 2. SRI. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. 3. SRI. ANANDA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS. 4. SRI. PRABHAKAR S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29531 M.F.A. No.8344/2024 5. SRI. RAMESH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. 6. SRI. KANTHARAJU ALIAS KANTHAPPA S/O LATE DODDAMUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT HOSAHUDYA VILLAGE VIJAYAPURA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH M. HEGDE, ADV., FOR R1 TO R5 R6 IS SERVED) - - - THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.292/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DEVANAHALLI, C/C II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, DEVANAHALLI AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 08.11.2024 ON I.A.NO.III IN O.S.NO.292/2024 AND ALLOW I.A. NO.III IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellants-plaintiffs questioning the order passed on I.A.No.3 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, wherein the application filed for temporary injunction is dismissed. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29531 M.F.A. No.8344/2024 2. The plaintiffs have filed a suit for partition and separate possession by metes and bounds claiming the suit properties to be the ancestral properties. The plaintiffs have filed an application for grant of temporary injunction which was rejected on the ground that the defendants have argued that there was a partition in the year 1998 and the plaintiffs' father and his family members sold the other properties but while filing the present suit, the said properties were not included in the present suit as also the plaintiffs admitted the alleged partition. Hence, on these reasons, the Trial Court dismissed the application filed for temporary injunction. When there is assertion by the defendants that there was an earlier partition in the year 1998 between the father of the plaintiffs and the defendant but this fact is not disclosed in the plaint and the defendants have filed objection to the application and disclosing the earlier partition which is not specifically denied by the plaintiffs. Furthermore, other properties were obtained by the plaintiffs in the year 1998 through earlier partition which were sold out by the plaintiffs and those properties were not included as the suit properties. Therefore, for these reasons, the Trial - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29531 M.F.A. No.8344/2024 Court dismissed the application of the plaintiffs which is correctly found as per the materials before the Court while considering the application for ad hoc injunction which needs no interference by this Court as there is no perversity in the order dismissing the application for temporary injunction. 3. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. 4. The observations made above are only for the purpose of considering the appeal and shall not be considered as the observations on merits and the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made above and consider the suit independently on its merits. 5. All the contentions are kept open. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38