IN THE HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA AT BANGAi;éiéE--_:.'
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY 01:' sEP'rEMB}3i§:'L20<if3:V'%Li%" "
BEFORE
THE HONBLE MR.JUSTIC3«E
M.F.A.No. 1264912007 C/w 13A{F;;1§.NoA.'12b3{) /'2oAt:é7{c..p{:}
IN ¥v¥.F'.A.No.1264912%7'_ V' .' :
BETWEEN:
Smt. Gangamma '- V V'
W/o. Late Chennappa
Aged about 36 ye:ujs"_'-- _ 1: 'V V:
R /0. N0.382O4iIz*«s/5{{1,_V_ New 5?: 'sisiock
Rajajinagar i¥ b '.
' 1}. ' ...Appe11a:nt
(By SriyuthslV'C.4.:R'.'\3o{11ajrAfgxfigfiyanand Araii, Advocates)
V. ,, .... " 'V
. Gowramma
V': _ D] 0-; _VSm£.'«l,a1;sh.:namma
1$g"<°<!'3% ' 33 }'.?»'é*19
N(:a.69,1, EW_"_1'~, Stage, $.33' 'B' Main Road
Yelahanka .New Town
V --V Ban.g'€e2i01'e§-560 O64. ...Re.spo:adeI:t
H ' " ' {B}: 1i~;"Lee1a1m*shnan, Advocate)
"MFA 1's¥o.§2649/2007 is filed under section 104 I/w
anger 43 Rule 10:3 (:90, against the order dated 08.08.2007,
"passed on IA No.1 in {).S.N0.62G8/06, on the fi}!3 of XIV
Add}. City Civil Jucige at Bangalore (CCH 28), allowing IA
' N01 filfid under Orcier 39 Rule I 5:. 2 C923, to gram; ad
interim izljtinction 8:; etc.
IN M.F.A.N0.1265Gi2007
l3.ETW BEN:
Sri. Yoganarasiznha Murthy
S/0. Late Narasaiab.
Agad, about 49 years
R/0. No.3820fAf6/1, Old nth cmas; ._
New 5"' Cross, '8' Block, Rajafizzagar 11' Stage
Bangalore. ' _
(By Sriyuths H.'I'.Jag_a11:1ath_a_ ' V» M3}. Sffiivafisareddy,
Advocates) V I " ' A H
AND:
Smt. ; i:;;._ ,
D/0. Smt.
Aged abtgut-.52Vyéafa."'~ T ' '
R] a: No.43] 4, I2 ~Méifi,._2fi'-¢__
Lakshmmwasimha Té311'p_lé",.-. Atfiguppe
Bangalqre-40;~ . _ ...Respondent
4, [By Dcvgndféappa 82; Associates. Advocates)
= ~ VM'.'§gA;,'N§:.'i2650/2007 is flied under Order 43 Rule 10:)
tVI:§;fv3V.0I*(i("3I' dattzd 08.08.2007, passed on LA No.1
in 0%,s.rq'o;cm:)7/2005, on the file gr XIV Addl. City Civil
~v'..___"~.Judge é:t B.anga1om, allcawing IA No.1 filed under Order 39
A X1' Rule" «-1 8:, 2 CFC to gent ad interim injunction 4&3 etc.
-It-:'r5r
These two agpitals coming on for admission this day,
the Court delivered the foiiowing:
3
JUDGMENT
Though the matters are in admission list,
taken up for final disposal with the consentfgf ‘ .
Counsel for both parties.
2. In these appeais, parties :fl;e’i:e_Ai
array before trial Court. _ V H
3. The plaintiffs in both éaughtem of
Smt.Lakshma;u1ma. The —sie«fenuia:;_: _0:.’S.}\io.6207] 2005 is
the eee eefefeeieet in O.S.No.6208/2006
is the wife ef eeeeeeee pIaintifi’s.
Q. It iéfile case that suit schedule property
to theii1″ey–«their mother under a gift deed dated
the case of plaintiffs that suit schedule
Vieequired by their mother from Bangalore
C [}eve’I<3p1$i1en.Vt:x Authority (for short, 'BDA'). The mother of
had oonstrueted house in suit schedule property.
~ e..ee.;e.e suit schedule property is described as 'A' schedule
" "property. The I–fioor gifted to praieties is described as 'B'
scheduie property. The 'B' schedule property has been
divided into two parts i.e., 'C' 85 'D' schedule propert:ies. The
"; AW
plaintifis have sought for permanent injtmction in nespect of
'D' schedule property.
5. it is the ease of defendants, suit
is joint family yroperty and it was acquired ‘
late Narasaiah and his sons. They cf
suit schedule property. The not
and enjoyment of suit schedule ‘}V”13.erefe:V;..”e,d’;”g}téiVii1tiffs
are not entitled to an ordegof i11juncti<V)i1."d
6. It is not in property was
aiiotteditto ‘mother of plaintiffs by BSA.
The pzamfifig have tltat their mother had executed
giit deed dated in respect of entire suit schedule
of defendants that suit scheduie property
_ by late Narasaiah, therefore, their mother
had no right in suit schedule property and
_d’e,n5tirei*’amoun.t for putting up const313ctio21 in suit schedule
was incurred by late Narasaiah, are the matters to
be decided durring tn’a1. The documents pmduced by
plaintiffs i.e., registered gift deed dated 10.02.2006, executed
N _W,._c£t
by Lakshmamma in favour of plaintifis would
(establish their posscssmn of ‘D’ suit schsedule ~
these circumstances, defendants }_j1_a:m=,__ ‘I10 ; t(:v-_’ ” V’
interfere with jplaintifis’ possession:’a;:1d; p€é1céf111*téiljfiijiiittfih
of ‘D’ scheduie property.
8. The learned Judgc_:___L:<S12:_pzn;v}_peI' cfifiéidefafion of
pleadings, documents :I1a_S held plaintifis
have made out .pI:ima'.~«facie 'casc "for""*ég.1'ént temporary
injuncfion tn —- 'from; interfcfing with
possession 13eé1(:e:ffi1':E:~1ijo§fv4I'ii1¢:§i't f”II)’ schedule property.
Therefore, I do to interfere with the
i13:;§a.ugned.»cirdef’.
.9′.V’ I_11u Ijclass the foI1oWi11g:–~
ORDER
_. are dismissed. S d I’
Judge
éNN