- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7083 RFA No. 1938 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1938 OF 2023 (INJ) BETWEEN: SMT.G.LAKSHMI W/O ANJANAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.212 GOVINDAPPA GARDEN HESARGHATTA ROAD T.DASARAHALLI BENGALURU-57 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.11 VIDYANAGARA (T.DASARAHALLI) N.H.R, TUMAKURU ROAD CHOKKASANDRA BENGALURU-560057 …APPELLANT (BY SRI.S.P.SHANKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI.PRASANNA D P, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI.MUNIRAJU C S/O LATE CHIKKA ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 252, 3RD MAIN 3RD CROSS, KANNADA KASTURI ROAD T.DASARAHALLI BENGALURU - 560 057 Digitally signed by AL BHAGYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7083 RFA No. 1938 of 2023 2. SRI.M.VINAY S/O MUNI ANJINAPPA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT NO.253, 4TH CROSS 2ND MAIN, K.K.ROAD T.DASARAHALLI BENGALURU-560 057 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.CHANDRAIAH, ADVOCATE) THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 13.09.2023 PASSED IN OS.NO.695/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XI ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, CITY, DISMISSING THE SUIT FOR INJUNCTION AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL JUDGMENT This captioned appeal is filed by the unsuccessful plaintiff assailing the judgment and decree dated 13.09.2023 passed in O.S.No.695/2017 on the file of XI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-8) in a suit for injunction simplicitor. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7083 RFA No. 1938 of 2023 2. This Court has carefully adverted to the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and the reasons assigned while non-suiting the plaintiff. A close scrutiny of the impugned judgment reveals that the Trial Court declined to grant the relief of bare injunction primarily on the ground that a registered sale deed stood in favour of defendant No.2. While dealing with a suit simpliciter for injunction, the Trial Court incidentally adverted to the rival claims of title and made certain observations touching upon the sale deed relied upon by defendant No.2, as also the Gift Deed under which the plaintiff traces his claim. However, such observations are only incidental and collateral in nature, rendered in the context of deciding entitlement to injunction and do not amount to a definitive or conclusive adjudication on title. It is well settled that in a suit for injunction, findings touching upon title are neither binding nor determinative, particularly when the relief sought is limited and the issue of title is not directly and substantially in issue. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7083 RFA No. 1938 of 2023 3. In the aforesaid backdrop, this Court finds merit in the submission that the plaintiff has been non-suited essentially due to the limited nature of the relief sought and not on account of any final adjudication of substantive rights. The present application under Order XXIII Rule 1 CPC seeks leave to withdraw both the suit and the appeal with liberty to institute a comprehensive suit for declaration of title and consequential reliefs. 4. This Court is of the considered view that permitting such withdrawal would subserve the ends of justice, as it would enable a complete and effective adjudication of the real controversy between the parties in an appropriately framed suit. At the same time, it is clarified that defendant No.2 shall not suffer any prejudice on account of such withdrawal and shall be at liberty to raise all available pleas, defences, and objections both on facts and in law in the proposed subsequent proceedings. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7083 RFA No. 1938 of 2023 5. In view of the above discussion and keeping in mind the principles underlying Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, I.A.No.1/2026 is allowed. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. The suit in O.S.No.695/2017 on the file of the Trial Court also stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty reserved to the plaintiff to institute a comprehensive suit for declaration of title and consequential reliefs on the same cause of action, in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that all contentions of all parties are kept expressly open and none of the observations made by the Trial Court or by this Court shall influence the adjudication of any subsequent proceedings. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6