Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 79463 (KAR)

SRI CHALUVARAJU @ SURESH, v. SMT. PRIYANKA

MFA/6096/2025 · 2025-12-11

Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52810 MFA No. 6096 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6096 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI CHALUVARAJU @ SURESH, S/O, LATE RAJU B M, BROTHER OF ANUSUYAMMA AGED ABOUT, 47 YEARS 2. SMT ANUSUYAMMA W/O, LATE RAJU B.M AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS 3. SMT RAMYA B R D/O, ANUSUYAMMA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS 4. MISS MEGHA B R D/O, ANUSUYAMMA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 5. MISS RASHMITHA B R D/O, ANUSUYAMMA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS 6. MISS MANYA B.R D/O ANUSUYAMMA AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS 7. SRI RAMU S/O NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52810 MFA No. 6096 of 2025 APPELLANTS NO. 1 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT, NO.152/13, 2ND CROSS, NEAR HOLY CHILD SCHOOL, PANTARAPALYA, NAYANDAHALLI POST MYSORE ROAD, BANGALORE -039 8. ARUN KUMAR S/O KEMPASIDDAIAH AND VARALAKSHMI AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, NO.28, 9TH CROSS, 1ST MAIN, VINAYAKA LAYOUT, BANGALORE 560 039 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHRIRAMA.,ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. PRIYANKA W/O SHASHIKUMAR KOLLI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT, NO. S257, 13TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, NEAR GANDHI PARK, BHARATHNAGAR 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 091 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. KUMAR DYAVAPATNA, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT.09.07.2025 PASSED ON IA NOS I AND II IN O.S.NO.4829/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CCH-36, ISSUING NOTICE AND SUIT SUMMONS TO THE IA.NOS 1 AND 2 TO THE DEFENDANTS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52810 MFA No. 6096 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Though the appeal is listed for orders, with the consent of both the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 2. This appeal is filed by the defendants in O.S.No.4829/2025 challenging the order dated 09.07.2025 passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2025 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC in O.S.No.4829/2025 on the file of XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-36)1, thereby, the applications filed seeking to grant an exparte ad interim order of temporary injunction were allowed by imposing certain conditions. 3. The exparte ad interim orders of temporary injunctions are not yet made absolute. Against the exparte temporary injunctions, the remedy lies to make application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC 1 hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’ for short - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52810 MFA No. 6096 of 2025 for vacating the order of exparte ad interim order of temporary injunction, but that is not made and without availing the same, the appeal has been filed. Also, this Court in catena of decisions has held that it is appropriate recourse to make an application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC, where an exparte ad interim order of temporary injunction is passed as the appeal filed against the exparte ad interim order of temporary injunction is not maintainable. Hence, the appeal is liable to be disposed of. 4. However, the liberty is reserved to the appellants/defendants to file an application for vacating the order of exparte ad interim injunction by invoking Order XXXIX Rule 4 read with Section 151 of CPC or any other law available under law. 5. Till passing of the order on the application filed for temporary injunction, there shall be an order of maintaining status-quo by directing both the parties - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52810 MFA No. 6096 of 2025 regarding the possession as on today. The appellants are directed to file an application for vacating the order of expare injunction within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order and after that, the Trial Court is directed to consider the said application in accordance with law within a period of one (1) month. 6. With these observations, the appeal is disposed off. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE SRA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30