High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S Seetha Sree Rama Charities … vs Balakrishna on 10 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
M/S Seetha Sree Rama Charities … vs Balakrishna on 10 September, 2008
Author: N.Ananda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED THIS THE mm DAY O3a"'SEPTE:MBE';ié«:2Q@)'8,A 

BEFORE t § _
THE HON'BLE MR.  N';ANg$:mA  H 
M.F.A.No.9_§1 o3J2CfC§3k%*%%'.*{:Pc)  

BETWEEN:

I

HAVING IS;'()}+'i?iICE AT" }%x_;>AGA_THI"
No.1, 7%: 'e,Ra_s,s'.R'oAm_,   
SHANTE"INA_f3AR,  é   Y
BANGALGR§)+.'2'3.. .   
REPRESEN'1?'ED B?Y'IT'S'TI'<'USTEE AND GENERAL
POWER OF A*'.'£?'FQRNEi'HCvI,DER, ARUNA RAVINDRA

M/S SEETHA. jsamg Ijé@fA_"g:HAi?i*If;~s:$"1'i2'Lis'r

M/ s.sr3R' DEVELGPER_S««Pv'JP LTD '
HAVING yrs OFP'ICE .A'1"ff-~G. R. PLAZA,
1ST_FLOO'R,V_N0;.1742, DVG ROAD,
Bs}iSA'vfANAGU'DI, _
3AN{}LORE~56O 004';

'  _BYITSf1&'IAN.8.GING mmacron,

mp :

'   KRISHAN 85 G.P.A. OF' PLTF': 1.

... APPELLANTS

  (By Sri:._ t: e1:3o:1é4aLAswAMY,ADvocATE)

_ VBAL-AKRISHNA

 PPOPRIETOR,
"M/S. SRIRANGA PRINTERS,
_ NO.5I'?, BRINDAVAN NAGAR,

' " " GAVIPURAM GUTTAHALLI,

BANGALORE.
 RESPONDENT

(By Sri: S SIDDAPPA FOR C/R }

BANWQRE f

6. The learned counsel for plaintiff’s V.

the dispute between parties relates to southefnv K

the suit schedule property. Ie’a1jne_d

having held that defendant in ;)ossessionfls;f ‘V L’

part of suit schedule property W3Oft.
ought to have dismissed ixitrespect of
southern part of instead of

directing both parties” status-quo in

respecttvofttentiie till the disposal

of the «It is that defendant has filed

5 O.S.3\_Io. 1 124412005 in zoéspect of site measuring 50ft. x

“v3Qfisi:”w.§t’1icfi ms eeee southern part of suit schedule

The counsel for defendant has not

3″”._ disputed.. that defendant’s interest is only in respect of

A part of the suit property measuring 50ft. X

f V vs .30}:

Thus real controversy between parifies is in

respect of the preperty measuring 50ft. X 30ft. which

forms southern part of suit schedule property.

8. On careful consideration of impugned order

with neferenee to submissions of learned eiifof V.

parfies, I am of the opinion, the K

requires modification. M T

9. Accordingly, I pass ghe

The appeal is The’ dvefeiidant is
restrained from of

noxfiiem par_1:4’suit se’iiedu1e’*–” measuring

East–Wvest ».’v44X:::Noi”éh–South 178 ft. pending

.–…a

i _ *2′, % _
disposal of-suite.’ * ‘

is directed to decide the case as

possible at any event not later than a

from the date of receipt of a copy of

Judge