- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53286 CRP No. 400 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 400 OF 2023 (EX) BETWEEN: SANNARANGAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, S/O CHIKKANNA, DABBAGUNTE, HULIYAR HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VINAYA KEERTHY M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. HANUMANTHA BOVI, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS, S/O BASAVA BOVI 2. BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, S/O HANUMANTHA BOVI, 3. GURUMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O HANUMANTHA BOVI, ALL ARE R/AT DABBAGUNTE, HULIYAR HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NAGARAJAPPA A., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 115 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE AGAINST THE Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53286 CRP No. 400 of 2023 ORDER DATED 20.03.2023 PASSED EX NO.28/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER 21 RULE 32 OF CPC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL ORDER Affidavit is filed by respondent No.1. Copy of the same is furnished to the counsel for the revision petitioner. 2. Sri Vinaya Keerthy M., learned counsel for the revision petitioner submits that the contents of the affidavit are incorrect. In fact, respondents have interfered with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. 3. For the sake of ready reference, contents of the affidavit are extracted hereunder: “I, Hanumantha Bovi, S/o Basav Bovi, aged about 78 years, residing at Dabbagunte, Huliyar Hobli, Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk, Tumkur District-572101. Now today at Bangalore. Do here by solemnly affirm and state on oath as follows, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53286 CRP No. 400 of 2023 1. I submit, I am the Respondent No.1 in the above CRP and I am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case hence I am swearing to this affidavit on behalf of me and also on behalf of two other Respondents. 2. 1 submit, the Petitioner preferred Execution No.28/2012 on the ground there is violation of the orders passed by the court and the trial court dismissed the Petition filed under Order 21 Rule 32 of the CPC. 3. I submit, that the Petitioner made an allegation that, myself and others are violating the orders of injunction and to that effect I have filed my objections to the said Petition that the property in question not identified with boundaries, Sy.No.22, is government land and the decree holder is not in possession and also denied that there was no such incident on 21.08.2012 and also that we have not trespassed into their land and also not obstructed their work and we have not assaulted them the allegations are denied as false. 4. 1 submit, that the allegations are very bad and the Petitioner is taking undue advantage of the said allegations were levelled against us. 5. I submit, I am the law-abiding citizen and I have got high respect regards for the orders of the court. At no point of time myself nor other Respondents violated the orders to that effect the detailed objections are also filed before the trail court in Execution No.28/2012. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53286 CRP No. 400 of 2023 WHEREFORE, it is prayed that this hon'ble court be pleased to reject the above petition in the interest of justice and equity.” 4. Placing the affidavit on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the apprehension of the petitioner, if any, stands quelled. 5. Accordingly, the following : ORDER (i) Civil Revision Petition Stands disposed of. (ii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE MR