Karnataka High Court
Aruna W/O Rajkumar Masareddy vs Rajakumar S/O Pandappa Masareddi on 3 August, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6135
WP No. 200334 of 2023
C/W CP No. 200035 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO. 200334 OF 2023 (GM-FC)
C/W
CIVIL PETITION NO. 200035 OF 2023
IN W.P.NO.200334/2023
BETWEEN:
ARUNA W/O RAJKUMAR MASAREDDI
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: H.H. WORK,
R/O TQ. MUDALAGI, DIST. BELAGAVI
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.YASHAS S. DIKSHIT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by B
NAGAVENI RAJAKUMAR S/O PANDAPPA MASAREDDI
Location: AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
High Court
Of Karnataka R/O KANABUR, TQ. BABALESHWAR
DIST. VIJAYAPURA
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. BAPUGOUDA SIDDAPPA, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 14.12.2022 ON I.A.NO.II IN O.S.NO.37/2022 ON THE
FILE OF FAMILY COURT, VIJAYAPURA WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-E
AND/OR PASS ANY OTHER ORDER AS THE COURT DEEMS FIT.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6135
WP No. 200334 of 2023
C/W CP No. 200035 of 2023
IN C.P.NO.200035/2023
BETWEEN:
ARUNA
W/O RAJKUMAR MASSREDDI (DIVORCED)
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: H.H.WORK,
R/O. TQ. MUDALAGI, DIST. BELAGAVI.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.YASHAS S. DIKSHIT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RAJKUMAR S/O PANDAPPA MASAREDDI
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KANABUR VILLAGE,
TQ. BABALESHWAR,
DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586113.
...RESPONDENT
THIS CIVIL PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 2A OF
THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1908 PRAYING TO PUNISH THE
RESPONDENT FOR HAVING WILLFULLY DISOBEYED AND
DELIBERATELY VIOLATED THE INTERIM ORDER OF RESTRAINING
THE RESPONDENT NOT TO ALIENATE THE PROPERTY VIDE ITS
ORDER DATED 27.01.2023 IN W.P.NO.200334/2023.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In W.P.No.200334/2023, the petitioner is assailing the order dated 14.12.2022 passed in O.S.No.37/2022 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Vijayapura, -3- NC: 2023:KHC-K:6135 WP No. 200334 of 2023 C/W CP No. 200035 of 2023 rejecting the application in I.A.No.2 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure.
2. The relevant facts for adjudication of the writ petition are that the petitioner claims to be the wife of respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 14.02.1999. It is stated in the writ petition that the respondent was not taking care of the needs of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner filed Crl.Misc.No.145/2002 seeking maintenance. The said petition was allowed by awarding maintenance of Rs.500/- per month to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent filed RPFC No.10/2003 before this Court challenging the order passed by the competent Court in Crl.Misc.No.145/2002. The respondent herein has filed memo seeking permission to withdraw the petition to settle the matter amicably. Thereafter, the petitioner filed O.S.No.37/2022 seeking direction to the defendant to pay maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month inter alia sought for creating charge in respect of the land -4- NC: 2023:KHC-K:6135 WP No. 200334 of 2023 C/W CP No. 200035 of 2023 mentioned in the plaint. Along with the plaint, the petitioner filed an application in I.A.No.2 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure seeking to restrain the defendant/respondent from alienating/mortgaging the schedule property. The Trial Court has granted exparte interim order and thereafter, on appearance of the respondent, the Trial Court after considering the averments made in the written statement as well as the objections filed by the respondent herein, rejected I.A.No.2 (Annexure-B) filed by the petitioner herein under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has presented the writ petition.
3. I have heard Sri.Yashas S. Dikshit, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Bapugouda Siddappa, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
4. Sri.Yashas S. Dikshit, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the finding recorded by -5- NC: 2023:KHC-K:6135 WP No. 200334 of 2023 C/W CP No. 200035 of 2023 the Trial Court while rejecting I.A.No.2 is contrary to law. The petitioner has approached the Court seeking maintenance and if the property is sold by the respondent, more hardship will be caused to the petitioner and hence, he sought for interference of this Court.
5. Per contra, Sri.Bapugouda Siddappa., learned counsel appearing for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order.
6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not dispute that the petitioner has filed O.S.No.37/2022 seeking relief of maintenance against the respondent herein. The petitioner filed an application seeking interim injunction against the respondent not to create any charge over the property. The Trial Court granted exparte temporary interim injunction and thereafter, vacated the same by rejecting I.A.No.2 filed by the petitioner. It is well established principle of law that in order to secure the discretionary relief by the parties, the applicant must state all the material facts before the Trial -6- NC: 2023:KHC-K:6135 WP No. 200334 of 2023 C/W CP No. 200035 of 2023 Court. The person who suppresses the material facts is not entitled for discretionary relief, since granting of injunction is based on the material facts produced by the parties and looking into the balance of convenience and the prima facie case to be made out by the applicant.
7. On perusal of the finding recorded by the Trial Court at paragraph-13 of the impugned order at Annexure-E and looking into the plaint averments produced at Annexure-A, it is clear that the plaintiff/petitioner has suppressed the fact that she has filed M.C.No.92/2007 and the competent Court has granted decree of divorce. In that view of the matter, the Trial Court is justified in rejecting I.A.No.2 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure.
8. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, C.P.No.200035/2023 is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE NB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31