man COURT or KARNATAKA. Hit.-'pl-¥ or KAMATAKA I-HG!-i COURT OF KARNATAKA men coma" or mnmrmm men COURT or KARNATAKA men 0
{N mg HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA __ 1' ' V
DATED 'I'HiS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPFE%£B,fE'RVv.?.fi{)8_ 3 "
BEFORE;_
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A;S.B0P.§--b.f§¢ A'
VKf.i9.E>I(>.735_2_9/;'_'{0_!V1.iVf$ {GMVCPQ17
BETWEEN:
MQHAMMABRASUL,
S/0 MUSTAFBAVA -.
@MAKAN£)AR, '
AGED 28, A V
OCC:AGRICULTL?_RE,;i:~' V . ' *
12/0 NAEATWAE3", ' 4. »
TQ: MUDDEBIHAL{_ "
. .. Petitianer.
{By Sri SR} PRAKASHV ADV.)
AND:
_1 sEcRéTAR$',
V . '- vsgzgm PA NcHAY'Ac"1i';' '
' n , N:==.LA':'wAB..,
TRv;A0'--NALATTwAD,
"_"£'Q: "MU.I)DEBIHAL.
' 2 A"-SAN{}A£8?§1¥3X,
W10" SANGAPPA HUNDEKAR,
AGE73 ":26 YRS,
" VTLQCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R70 NALATWAD,
"FQ. MUI)¥Z)EiB§H£:L
Respondents.
«(By Sré s.s.KUMMAN, AGA. FOR R-1
Sri SB. SHAHAPUR, ADV, FOR R-2)
X
-7
I-:I(.-ii”! COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGI-£fi§20.l:lRT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C
This Writ Petition is fiied under Articies 226 a1’2’d'”252?T”<34f the
Constitution of indie, praying ta quash the order <:§ateti"'3'.'3.§',Zf.}_{}€$ paesed
by the Civil Judge (Jr.Dr1} Muddebihal in Civil. Misc' N<5;4/2{3(}_4"w.x3i*1'i9hv,ie
produced at Annexure~»F. ' * .
This Writ Petition coming on for ;V3z’e1i:?;1i:1£:’:;ry”e’:1eat’ii°};g”E_éf’-gr¢§z;;Vp’ thie .
day, the Court made the followingf
o1£;eE;R_V
Sri S.S.Kumma11; O Advocate te
accept notice __fe1:f V’aI1:x}V file his memo of
appearance ‘ef__ weeks.
2. this Court seeking for issue
ef Writ as eei’t.%.era1fi’VtdA*-rgétuatsh the order dated 3.3.2006 passed
by .1 (221711 ‘V”VJuc1ge {Jr.If)I1.), Muddebiha}, in cm
is impugned at Annexme-F to the
petitjen. _ ‘O
V’ The pefitioner was the piainfifi iI1’Q.S.N().3-39/99.
‘_§’_};fe saié suit was instituted against responéent No.2 for
permanent injxmctien to restrain the 2nd respondent herein
{rem putting up construction on the suit schedule pmperty.
3:
HIGH t..UUR’I OF KARNATAKA H16!-I OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF XARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH C
therefore the petition was dismissed. Insofar as.t}1e-ifeasoning
adapted by the Court below’, I do not find
can for interference.
4. Having Said so, ae to
Whether any prejudice: Viihexvjpetitioner in
this regard and whethee ifequired to interfere
with the in dispute that
for a bare injunction to
restrain up construction. At
the that if such a grievance existed
in the inthe 1999 and if there was no interim
‘O V. “er;ie::’.{epe’fratizig the 2nd respondent in usual course,
activity would have been compieted.
Z _ How-e_iIe1fx,> any reason, the petitioner has any grievance
” is fresh cause of action, the dismissal of the suit
*»nen–pmsecutien and snbseqneni dismissal of the
njjliwieceilaneous petition wouid not come in the way of the
” ‘jfietitjoiier in exercising such legal rights that would be
avaiiable to the petitioner in iew.
i
-u
I
…… …………. V. nvnnaintruvi ruun ur RAKNAIAIEA 1-EIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CC
With the above observations, the “‘
disposed of with no order as to costs’.
k % 2S
,M ,Iud9e
j5fi%%T