IN THE HIGH COURT arr KARNATAKA A'? BAN'r§;ALg:>:éiE"% " '
DATED THIS THE 1422: DAY C)F'B'EGEM'BER,:A2{}i.;9 '
§;ii:3F()Ki::} _ _
THE HONBLE MR.JL.r3'f;{j:E..SUBH.asH,Vg_Ai3§"'
M.F.A.Nc;s13aV1.;2:i{)_gg {£3.91-C; ' :
BETWEEN:
Dr. Gfiathna V V' -
W/o.Dr.Ni£a11jaj122'««i$§t:rth3; g
Agad about '
I2/a: NQ,18/E41, " A
Muruihi Extelmioiz;;S1i1:;,41i1;;tin:£2:1___
'BangaIorc"~;*§6flf}2l. '71 ...Appr:flant
(By Sri B;"§3li2§;ath._
AND; V' % ' '
1.
$::i1.?1utaga’-K_Lim:}a1′ 1*>ande.s
~ S5}/0. Sri S:1ryana_rajy*ana P:–mrk:.K
” .;.S:11i.;;”–S,L*i*.ré;r;ii:i:1:.-at
A . ‘W; 0.’ Pix:-t:fa§pV Kumar Pa1:::ie.S
Majo;’.
-. Emth am” 1%/$1: No.76, “Parijafha”
* 2?ff3″E9’1:)::sr, West Park Road
‘ I3aeTewee:: 17th and I833 Crass
_ Mé.fiéfs¢?aram, I3a.:1gaiore–i’3-60 093.
The Malleswaram C043-perative Bank Ltd.
No.102, 791 Cross, Malicswaram
i3angal::>re~E56£) 003
Reg. by its Gensrai M:anagcr.
I’-J
Mr.N’Ra.mesh
S/tr). Mayanna
Aged ahmlii Sf} years
R] 22:: No.68, Temple Kc-ad
Malhka1′ * juna Punt, Mulh:-swa11a1xiA” ”
P.anga”lm=::~S60 003. 7
(By Srjyuths Ha.t’is11 Kama: M.*E3,_ 82;
for R1 &.R”.3} ‘ . ‘ . ‘
This appeal is fiIet:l__un<:Ier V€):*«:Ai.é:r_ 43 R1116'-"1{!'_} (sf Ci.P.C.,
agairmt the s;-rder ciatadv 'f£9_.10._'2009;" .pF,ts§¢'~;d on LA No.3. in
O.S.N.6I32[2009, on l}It:” ‘-fiffxluf Li'{_13::j XLl:VxA£idI. City Civil 85
Sesfiiems Judge, Baiagalme, (C3€;?I~i N0’.’45),__af.£$m’i.3sn__1g the LA. filed
tinder Order 39 Ruhas 1 &, 225$ vC.:P.C;-;Afe:;1* t»:ai’npc3r§;ix*y Enjunction.
This appeal 45$-z’1*1i 1:g::;:§£1§
11:3} aéifrxivssidzz–‘i’l1is day, tha C43u1’t
delivered the {0iic3i.v§rig:.. ‘ ‘ »
:4: N T
‘;’his pg” ga -fippeai agamst the orcier dated
29.19.2009 0″;.s;”r’~i.;..6132/ 2009, by the XLIV Acid}.
‘V V’ “City Sessionsv Jiiéigc, Bangaiorc.
‘ V T_ had filed an :a1pp}.§:atia;s11 IA No.1 under
G:;fic;;§?s9 85 2 of C.F’.C., ilitfif aha seeking temporary
,i;1junctLav1fi’,’;_ msnahnng the ééiiziizdants 31295} their pflJ.”${.}I}$
~ m1&e1~ {hem mm i.;1f.e.rfe1:’i:1g with peacéfnl
___”‘T« ‘p0Vs;sessi0n and -sznjoyment of suit scheciule gropcity.
3. Responcients 1 8:. 2 dam: that, they are auctism
purchasers and xespoxzdent No.4 claim that he is the original
j .I.. R’-;:S;.}{)’¥1¢i’c’r’:’z’.,<j. 7' T .'
f.&¥.§((}-i:\T
K'
owner of suit s:::i1e£¥11ica~ property. The pi:-ce:_.4 un:iv::r_t£1e
Karnataka C4o~opcrative Socifities fiéxt, §§L_9£’$9 fczi’
certaixfx amount In [)111’S118.El(3ti’ZV_ffi)’f__.’fI1I3′!Afiifittf by
arbitrate», auctisivn sale was 2 wet?
the highest bidders a1}VfiA’*«–._i:1:i*’3– . has 3139 been
issued 12:1 their fa vQ_ur. A V
4. The ‘V1″§:3r%§11t.?:,v?§.~*B”1*cé*;pondent submits
that the 4:1; appeal before the
Vhe has also subnlitteci
that the =4’? in settling the matter.
3 “‘1’h.e :4 tenant claizned to be in pcsssessisn
pmgerty. The plaintiff’ alleges that she was
mspondent as a tenant and she has been
1:1 pArc5;€z.s¢.esg§it:£r;A«:”‘¥::v1” suit SC:hCC£l1lt’3 property Sim;-é {}1.%.;’?.009.
‘ “‘–. §£?’heg’¢:as;z, ‘£§::i& learned Counsel apyearing tbr mspondc:-fits I 35
vV’3:1:iz”.;%¥7;f:’A£’i1:S that sale cmiificate was issues! on 18.96.2909 and
K 1:11:31 by Viflilifi of said salt: {2f:£’tifi!.”:251t€, fl}=!:’§?” have
W U : b€3C0m& 1:5’Wl}C£”‘3 of suit ta;-héduic pmpcrty.
…_. *2
6. N0 dc:-ubt fl1€£’C is an appeal ‘
Kanzataka Appellate Tribunal. The 13:35 “fie-»;$;p3§e:.ig:gVgs%- 1′ ”
to pay rent to rcspoudents 3 & 2. t’;1e *~i.*?’*
claims that he is the owner of v,~31¢ giaé
not digputed salt certificate jss11§;i” fissgéééndfints
1 8:. C2. The payment sf xfispondents 1
6:; 2 is smbject to _the pending
beibre the ‘f:’ri:ij5i;x:ii&I;’VV’;I’he plaixitifi has
isgued a clxeéfié I 65 2 Ear a 81151} of
Rs. OfNtC3VCfl1bf:1″‘ 2009.
The said up-:a.}”rn1c=.-V11″3: prejudice to the rights of
appclla:11;_As itgards of mint, the same has to 1):
“:;eg1dm€§ of the appeai beficare the
.Tribu11al.
A’}1__ afisresaiii oiaservatiens, the appeal is
” I fiiépgscci Z
SE1/-3
JUDGE
QNN