- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51407 WP No. 33068 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 33068 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SANTHOSH KUMAR A. S., S/O. LATE. SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT, ASOKA EXTENSION, ADUVALLI, NEAR KSRTC DEPOT, HASSAN - 573 201. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GANGARAJU C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. GEETHAMMA W/O. LATE. SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS., 2. SRI SHAMSUNDHAR A.S. S/O. LATE SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 35, YEARS., SL.NOS.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT ASHOKA EXTENTION, ADUVALI, NEAR KSRTC DEPOT, HASSAN - 573 201. Digitally signed by VALLI MARIMUTHU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51407 WP No. 33068 of 2025 3. SMT ROHINI S., DAUGHTER OF LATE KUMAR W/O. LATE UMESH KUMAR A.S. AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS. AK COLONY, KORVANGALLA VILLAGE, DODDA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 27.08.2024 PASSED ON IA NO. III IN MISC. APPEAL NO. 22/2023 IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN (ANNX-H) AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 12.07.2023 PASSED IN OS NO. 299/2023 BY THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HASSAN, BY DISMISSING THE IA NO. III FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 AND SEC 151 OF CPC TO RESTRAIN THE R-3/D-3 FROM RELEASING SUIT ITEM NO.3 OF SCHEDULE PROPERTY TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE SUIT BY ALLOWING THE IA NO. III FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S NO. 299/2022 AT ANNX-A, AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN ORDER DTD 12.07.2022 PASSED IN OS NO. 299/2022 BY THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC HASSAN AT ANNX-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51407 WP No. 33068 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Gangaraju C., learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner instituted O.S. No.299/2022 before the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hassan (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’) seeking partition. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure in I.A. No.III, seeking to restrain defendant No.3 from releasing suit Item No.3 of the schedule property. The said application came to be rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Miscellaneous Appeal No.22/2023 before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellate Court’). The Miscellaneous Appeal also came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 27.08.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that suit Item No.3 comprises jewellery purchased out of joint family funds and was given to defendant No.3 at the time of her - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51407 WP No. 33068 of 2025 marriage. It is further submitted that when the husband of defendant No.3, who was the brother of the plaintiff, was hospitalised, the entire medical expenses were met out of the joint family property. After the death of Umesh Kumar, defendant No.3 pledged the said jewellery and raised a loan of Rs.5,00,000/-. The plaintiff now seeks to discharge the loan, which was availed for medical expenses, by securing release of the jewellery and selling the same. 3.1 It is contended that if the jewellery is released in favour of defendant No.3, it would no longer be available for partition. Learned counsel submits that both the trial Court and the appellate Court erred in not appreciating the aforesaid aspects. 4. Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 5. As recorded by the trial Court, defendant No.1 is the mother, defendant No.2 is the brother, and defendant No.3 is the sister-in-law of the plaintiff, constituting a joint family. Defendant No.3 is married to Umesh Kumar A.S., the elder - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51407 WP No. 33068 of 2025 brother of the plaintiff. At the time of the said marriage, it is claimed that 220.6 grams of jewellery were given to defendant No.3 out of joint family funds. 6. It is stated that defendant No.3 pledged the said jewellery with Canara Bank and obtained a loan of Rs.5,00,000/-. Alleging that defendant No.3 is attempting to secure release of the said gold ornaments, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.III seeking an order of restraint against defendant No.3 from releasing the jewellery, which constitutes suit Item No.3 of the schedule property, pending disposal of the suit. 7. The trial Court, however, noticed that there was no material placed on record to establish that the gold ornaments were given to defendant No.3. It was further recorded that the description of the jewellery allegedly given to defendant No.3 had not been furnished. 8. It was further held that if the gold ornaments were given to defendant No.3 at the time of her marriage, the same would constitute her absolute property, entitling her to deal with them in any manner. It was also held that the plaintiff had - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51407 WP No. 33068 of 2025 failed to establish ownership over the gold jewellery and, therefore, no direction could be issued in that regard. The said findings were affirmed by the appellate authority for the very same reasons. 9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the same submissions before this Court. However, no additional material has been placed on record to demonstrate ownership of the jewellery in question before this Court. There is no ground made out to find any error or irregularity in the finding recorded by the trial Court. 10. There is no ground made out to interfere with the impugned orders. This Court finds no merit in the writ petition and, accordingly, the same stands dismissed. SD/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7