- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9769 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. IQBAL UNNISA D/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, W/O LATE MOHAMMED SUFIYAN, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK-572 137, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI FAYAZ SAB B.G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI MOHAMMED MUMTAZ AHMED S/O LATE ABDUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 2. SMT. SADIQ UNNISA, D/O. MOHAMMED MUMTAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 3. SMT. FATHIMA BI, D/O. MOHAMMED MUMTAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 4. SRI MOHAMMED JAFAR AHMED, S/O MOHAMMED MUMTAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 5. SMT. JEELANI BANU, D/O. MOHAMMED MUMTAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 6. SRI MOHAMMED SIDDIQ AHMED, S/O MOHAMMED MUMTAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 7. SMT. ASMATH UNNISA, W/O LATE MOHAMMED SAIFULLA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 8. SRI FAROOQ AHMED, S/O LATE MOHAMMED SAIFULLA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 9. SMT. MEHAR TAJ, W/O LATE MOHINUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 10. SMT. SHABRIN TAJ, D/O. LATE MOHINUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 11. SMT. NASREEN TAJ, D/O. LATE MOHINUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 12. SRI ABDUL WAHAB S/O LATE MOHINUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 13. SRI MOHAMMED FAREED, S/O LATE ABUL KHALAQ, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 14. SMT. REHANA BEGUM, D/O LATE JULEKHABI & AMEER BAIG, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT MAHABOOB NAGAR, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 15. SRI MAHABOOB BAIG, S/O LATE JULEKHABI & AMEER BAIG, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT MAHABOOB NAGAR, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 16. SMT. MOHSEENA KHANUM, D/O. LATE SATTAR KHAN & LATE SAJIDUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 17. SRI NAYAZ KHAN, S/O LATE SATTAR KHAN & LATE SAJIDUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 18. SRI AYAZ KHAN, S/O LATE SATTAR KHAN & LATE SAJIDUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT KACHERI MOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572 137. 19. SRI MOHAMMED ISMAIL S/O LATE ABDUL SALAM & LATE MAZARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT ZEEFLEX, NAYAKARA HATTI, NEAR CIVIL BUS STAND, SIRA TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 20. SRI MOHAMMED IBRAHIM S/O LATE ABDUL SALAM & LATE MAZARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOTI MOHALLA, NEAR PDS SOCIETY, SIRA TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 21. SMT. DISHAD UNNISA D/O LATE ABDUL SALAM & LATE MAZARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT MOTIMOHALLA, SIRA TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 22. SRI MOHAMMED YUSUF S/O LATE ABDUL SALAM & LATE MAZARUNNISA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT SINGH LAYOUT, NEAR HMR DARGHA, SIRA TOWN, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 23. SRI M.R. SHASHIDHAR GOWDA, S/O M. RANGANATHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 RESIDING AT GOWDAGERE VILLAGE, GOWDAGERE HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 24. SMT. S.L. JYOTHILAKSHMI, W/O M.R. SHASHIDHAR GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDING AT 8TH CROSS, MUNICIPAL LAYOUT, SIDDAGANGA EXTENSION, TUMAKURU-572102. 25. SRI SATHISH S/O NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT RANGAPURA, KOTTA MAJARE, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 26. SMT. MADHURI .M W/O KARIYANNA B.D. AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT BHATTAGANAHALLI VILLAGE, DODDA AGRAHARA POST, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 27. SRI RANGANATHAPPA .L.M S/O MARANNA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT NO.11, SREE MARUTHI NILAYA, PATEL BYRAPPA LAYOUT, CHIKKABIDARAKALLU ROAD, CHIKKANAYAKANAPALYA, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU-560073. 28. SMT. T. ANITHA, W/O RANGANATHAPPA .L.M. AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT NO.11, SREE MARUTHI NILAYA, PATEL BYRAPPA LAYOUT, CHIKKABIDARAKALLU ROAD, CHIKKANAYAKANAPALYA, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU-560073. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 29. SRI A. SHANTHARAJU, S/O RANGANNA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT ANUPANAHALLI VILLAGE, HONNAGONDANAHALLI POST, SIRA TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572137. 30. SRI B.V. THRIMURTHY, S/O LATE VENKATACHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT BEJJIHALLI VILLAGE, HULIKUNTE HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. 31. SMT. SHABRIN TAJ W/O AFZAL PASHA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT 6TH CROSS, SREERAM NAGAR, TUMAKURU-572102. 32. SMT. SUNANDA .K W/O SATHISH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT RANGAPURA, KOTE MAJARE, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VIVEK SUBBAREDDY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHAIK ISMAIL ZABIULLA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3, R-5 TO R-13 & R-16 TO R-19; SRI PRABHUGOUD B. TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; SRI RAVI A., ADVOCATE FOR R-14, R-15, R-20 TO R-22; R-24, R-29, R-30 & R-31 ARE SERVED–UNREPRESENTED; V/O. DATED 12.02.2026, NOTICE TO R-23 – HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2025 PASSED ON I.A.NO.2 IN O.S.NO.399/2025 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIRA, REJECTING THE I.A.NO.2 FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CP, ON COST. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DICTATING JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is directed against the order dated 16.12.2025 passed on I.A. No.2 in O.S. No.399/2025 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira (‘Trial Court’ for short), whereby the application filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC seeking temporary injunction came to be rejected and an ex parte interim temporary injunction granted on 18.10.2025 was vacated. Brief facts: 2. The plaintiff instituted suit seeking for partition and separate possession of her share in the suit schedule property, measuring 10 acres 29 guntas, situated at Kallukote Village, Sira Taluk, contending that the property originally belonged to her father Abdul Khalaq, who died intestate and that she, along with other legal heirs, succeeded to get the property under Mohammedan Law of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 Succession. It is the case that the defendants, without allotting her legitimate share, have set up an alleged partition deed dated 16.09.1999 and subsequently, executed another partition deed dated 09.04.2025 and created several sale deeds in favour of third parties and all behind her back without her consent and are now making attempts to alienate and develop the property by forming a layout. 3. The defendants, on the other hand, contend that there is a Panchayath Palupatti in 1999 under which the plaintiff received consideration and relinquished her share and that the partition deed of 2025 was acted upon and the revenue records, mutated accordingly. It is submitted that the land was converted for non-agricultural use and a layout was formed, sites have been sold and third party rights have been already created and the plaintiff had approached the Court belatedly without clean hands. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 4. Sri Fayaz Sab, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the plaintiff, being the legal heir, is entitled to a share under the Mohammedan Law, which opens immediately upon the death of the propositus. The alleged partition deeds of 1999 and 2025 are fraudulent, fabricated and not binding on her. That the defendants, have illegally alienated portions of the property without her consent and that the Trial Court has erred in entering into the disputed questions of fact, treating the matter as though it were finally adjudicated title, ignoring the settled principles governing the grant of temporary injunction. Unless a restraint order, the defendants will continue to create third party rights, thereby causing irreparable injury. 5. Per contra, learned senior counsel, Sri Vivek Subbareddy appearing on behalf of Sri Shaik Ismail, learned counsel for the respondents, submits that the plaintiff is not entitled to any equitable relief of injunction, inasmuch as she has already relinquished her share under - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 the panchayat palupatti and has accepted monetary consideration. It is further contended that the registered partition deed has been duly acted upon and consequent mutation entries have been effected in the revenue records. It is submitted that the suit schedule property, has already been converted for non-agricultural purposes, developed into a layout, and that sites have been formed and sold to third parties. Therefore, the plaintiff, who has approached the Court after considerable delay and by suppressing material facts, is not entitled to the discretionary relief of injunction. 6. Without prejudice to the above contention, learned senior counsel further submits that, even if the plaintiff's claim is to be considered under Mohammedan Law, her entitlement would only be to a limited share. It is contended that the share of the plaintiff would not exceed 1/12th, having regard to the number of heirs, and in any event would be only a fractional portion, such as 1/12th or lesser, depending upon the final adjudication. It is further - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 submitted that the plaintiff’s interest can be safeguarded by earmarking sites equivalent to such fractional share, which, according to the respondents, would approximately correspond to five sites and that there is no necessity to restrain the defendants from dealing with the entire property. 7. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 8. It is not in dispute that the suit schedule property originally belonged to late Abdul Khalaq, who died intestate and the parties to the proceedings are his legal heirs. The contention of the respondents is that the plaintiff has relinquished her share under the Panchayat Palupatti and that registered partition deed has been acted upon, as evidenced by mutation entries and the subsequent development of the property into a layout. The alleged alienation of sites, however, is a matter that is seriously disputed by the plaintiff. The validity and binding - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 nature of such documents and transactions necessarily require adjudication in the suit and cannot be conclusively determined in this interlocutory stage. 9. The Trial Court, while rejecting the application, has considered the development of the property. The material on record indicates that the property has been converted and developed into a layout. Third party rights have been created. Therefore, granting an injunction in its entirety, as sought by the plaintiff would result in undue hardship to the defendants. However, the plaintiff’s status as one of the legal heirs is not in serious dispute. Under Mohammedan Law, when both male and female heirs succeed, a male heir takes a share equal to twice that of a female heir. 10. In the present case, it is prima facie seen that Abdul Khalaq was survived by four sons and four daughters, assigning two units to each son and one unit to each daughter. The total works out to 12 units. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 Accordingly, each son would be entitled to 2/12th (1/6th) share and each daughter would be entitled to 1/12th share. The plaintiff, being one of the daughters, her share is thus prima facie quantified at 1/12th share in the suit schedule property and the plaintiff’s interest can be safeguarded by earmarking a portion equivalent to her share. 11. While the plaintiff has made out a prima facie case to the extent of her share, the balance of convenience requires that the property is not stalled in its entirety. But the plaintiff's quantified share must be protected so as to preserve the subject matter of the suit. Accordingly, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed in-part. ii. The impugned order dated 16.12.2025 passed on I.A. No.2, in O.S. No.399/2025 - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira, is set aside and modified. iii. For the purpose of an interim arrangement, it is held that the plaintiff has made out a prima-facie case for entitlement to a 1/12th share in the suit schedule property. iv. The defendants are restrained from dealing with the property to the extent of that share. v. The defendants shall earmark and reserve an equivalent 1/12th share and shall not alienate, encumber or create third party rights in respect of the said portion. vi. The alienations made by the defendants, apart from the 1/12th share, shall be subject to the result of the suit, and shall reflect the plaintiff's share is preserved. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23771 MFA No. 9769 of 2025 vii. It is made clear that the observation made herein is a prima facie in nature and shall not influence the Trial Court while deciding the suit on merits. viii. The Trial Court shall dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 70