Sri L R Ananth vs Dr. S Jayaramachandran on 3 August, 2012

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri L R Ananth vs Dr. S Jayaramachandran on 3 August, 2012

Bench: N.Ananda

                                 1


  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

       DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF AUGUST 2012

                            BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA

                  M.F.A.No.5321/2010 (CPC)

BETWEEN:

Sri L.R.Ananth
S/o L.S.Rangappa
Aged about 59 Years
R/at No.1099(1099/13), 18th main
5th Block, Rajajinagar, Bangalore -10
Also Present Address at:
No.10, West of Chord Road
Behind G.D.Naidu Hall
11th 'A' Cross, 2nd Stage
Mahalakshmipuram
Bangalore - 560086.                          ... Appellant

(By Sri V.Y.Kumar, Advocate)

AND:
1. Dr.S.Jayaramachandran
   S/o Dr.J.Sugavanam
   Aged 57 Years
   R/at No.5, Ramakrishna Road
   Salem, Tamil Nadu
   Rep. by GPA Holder
   Dr.Chandrika Balachandran.

2. Dr.Chandrika Balachandran
   Aged about 57 Years
   R/at No.13, Subbaiahreddy Road
   Ulsoor, Bangalore - 560 008
   Now at Woodside House
   Woodside Drive, Barmingham.
                                   2



3. Sri M.G.Rajgopal
   Aged 50 Years.

4. Sri M.G.Balakrishna
   Aged 50 Years.

5. Sri M.G.Ravi Kumar
   Aged 50 Years.

All are sons of late Gangabyraiah
R/o No.435, 12th 'A' Main, 4th Cross
WCR, 2nd Stage, 2nd Phase
Mahalakshmipuram
Bangalore - 560 086.                          ...Respondents

(By Sri D.Prabhakar, Advocate for R3 to R5; R1 - Served; Notice
issued to R2)

       This appeal is filed under order 43 Rule 1(r) C.P.C., praying
to set aside the order dated 01.04.2010, passed on I.A.No.6 in
O.S.No.4088/2005, on the file of XXXIX Additional City Civil
Judge at Bangalore, dismissing I.A.No.6 and etc.

       This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court
delivered the following:

                         JUDGMENT

The learned trial Judge has dismissed the application of plaintiff for grant of temporary injunction holding that defendants have taken possession of suit schedule property in Execution Petition No.749/2008, which was filed to execute the decree passed in O.S.No.7338/2005. O.S.No.7338/2005 was filed by defendants against plaintiff 3 and there was decree for ejectment. The defendants have taken possession from plaintiff in Execution Petition No.749/2008. The learned trial Judge has held that in view of above proceedings, plaintiff has failed to make out a prima facie case for grant of temporary injunction to restrain defendants from alienating suit schedule property.

2. There is no merit in the appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE SNN

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court