Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 89128 (KAR)

SRI K LAKSHMAN REDDY v. SMT. ADILAKSHMAMMA

WP/5164/2021 · 2025-11-10

S Vishwajith Shetty

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45494 WP No. 5164 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 5164 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI K. LAKSHMAN REDDY S/O K. NARASIMHA REDDY AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS. 2. SMT. PAPAMMA W/O K. LAKSHMAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS. 3. SRI ADINARAYANA REDDY W/O K. LAKSHMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS. 4. SRI NARASIMHA REDDY S/O K LAKSHMAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS. 5. SRI NAGI REDDY S/O K. LAKSHMAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. 6. SRI CHANDRA SHEKAR REDDY S/O K LAKSHMAN REDDY AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDENT OF YERRAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI GUDIBANDE TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 561 209. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI VARADARAJAN M.S, ADV.) AND: SMT. ADILAKSHMAMMA Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45494 WP No. 5164 of 2021 W/O LATE HARIGALA MALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS R/AT YERRAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, GUDIBANDE TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561 209. SINCE DEAD BY HER LR 1(a) SRI M. SRINIVASA S/O ARIGAL MALLAPPA & ADILAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT YEARS RESIDING AT 11TH CROSS GUDIBANDE TOWN PANCHAYATH OPPT. UNION BANK GUDIBANDE TALUK CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561 209. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRASANNA KUMAR R.S, ADV.) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DTD 08.01.2021 PASSED IN MA NO.39/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GUDIBANDE VIDE ANNX-A.SET-ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 30.11.2018 PASSED ON IA NO.1 IN O.S.95/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GUDIBANDE VIDE ANNX- B. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Defendants no.1 to 6 are before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution with a prayer to set aside the order dated 30.11.2018 passed on I.A.No.I in O.S.No.95 of 2017 by the Court of Civil Judge and JMFC, Gudibande and the order dated 08.01.2021 passed in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45494 WP No. 5164 of 2021 M.A.No.39 of 2018 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gudibande. 2. Heard the Learned counsel for the parties. 3. O.S.No.95 of 2017 is filed before the Jurisdictional Civil Court at Gudibande, Chikkaballapura District seeking the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property and in the said suit, the contesting defendants have entered appearance and filed their written statement. I.ANo.I was filed in O.S.No.95 of 2017 on behalf of the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Rule 2 of CPC and the prayer made in the said application was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing objection. The trial Court by the order dated 30.11.2018 had allowed I.A.No.I and being aggrieved by the same, the defendants had filed Miscellaneous Appeal No.39 of 2018 before the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Gudibande, which was dismissed on 08.01.2021. Aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, the defendants are before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45494 WP No. 5164 of 2021 Courts below were not justified in passing the impugned orders. The contentions urged on behalf of the defendants has not been properly appreciated by the Courts below which has resulted in passing of the erroneous orders. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that suit in O.S.No.95 of 2017 is now at the stage of addressing final arguments. Concurrent findings have been recorded by the two Courts against the petitioners herein. At this stage, it is not necessary to disturb the said findings and the status quo prevailing as on this day may be continued and the trial Court may be directed to dispose of O.S.No.95 of 2017 within a time frame. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners does not oppose the prayer made by the learned counsel for the contesting respondent. 7. Submissions made on both sides are placed on record. 8. Accordingly, the following :- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45494 WP No. 5164 of 2021 ORDER Writ petition is disposed of with a request to the trial Court to dispose of O.S.No.95 of 2017 on merits as expeditiously as possible, but not later than a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Pending IAs' do not survive for consideration and accordingly the same are disposed of. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44