- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010348342026 NC: 2026:KHC:42043 RSA No. 892 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA REGULAR SECOND APPEAL No.892 OF 2026 (INJ) BETWEEN: JAMEEL AHAMED S/O LATE MOHAMMED JAMEER AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A MAYASANDRA VILLAGE MAYASANDRA HOBLI TURUVEKERE TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT PIN 572 221 …APPELLANT (BY SRI B RAMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: SHAHERAB @ BANU S/O LATE MOHAMMED JAMEER AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS R/A MAYASANDRA VILLAGE TURUVEKERE HOBLI TUMKURU DISTRICT PIN - 572221 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI C.R.GOPALASWAMY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI BHARGAV.G, ADVOCATE) THIS RSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 100 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.02.2026 PASSED IN RA NO.46/2025 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TURUVEKERE., DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 8.04.2025 PASSED IN O.S.NO.191/2020 ON THE FILE OF LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TURUVEKERE. Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010348342026 NC: 2026:KHC:42043 RSA No. 892 of 2026 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri B.Ramesh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri C.R.Gopalaswamy, learned Senior Advocate for the respondent. 2. A memo was filed on 06.08.2026. Memo reads as under: “The appellant above named being aggrieved against the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2026 passed in R.A.No.46/2025 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Turuvekere and the judgment and decree dated 08.04.2025 passed in O.S.No.191/2020 by Civil Judge and JMFC, Turuvekere, has preferred this Regular Second Appeal. It is submitted that, both the parties in the above appeal are claiming rights based on the registered WILL and as per the partition deed, however, the respondent contrary to the boundaries stipulated under the said WILL and the partition deed had filed a suit and obtained a decree by restraining the appellant from interfering with his possession and the respondent by taking advantage of the judgment and decree passed by the Court below the respondent is trying to make a claim over the property of the appellant. WHEREFORE, the appellant seeks leave of this Hon’ble court to permit the appellant to withdrawn the accompanying appeal with a liberty to a file a comprehensive suit seeking for a relief of declaration and other consequential reliefs without affecting his right over the property claimed by him as per the WILL and partition deed which is in his possession by accepting this memo, in the interest of justice and equity.” - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010348342026 NC: 2026:KHC:42043 RSA No. 892 of 2026 3. The present Second Appeal is by the defendant. Plaintiff is having the benefit of an order of permanent injunction. It is the case of the defendant that he is the owner of the property. 4. If it is so, the defendant is required to file a comprehensive suit establishing his title. Needless to emphasize that the plaintiff will have all defences to be argued in the intended suit. 5. If, on contest, the defendant succeeds in the comprehensive suit in establishing his title over the suit property, necessarily the injunction order that has been passed in favour of the plaintiff will be subservient to such a comprehensive decree. 6. With that observation, memo is accepted and appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE kcm List No.: 1 Sl No.: 97