Karnataka High Court
Sri P Venugopal vs Petra Gold Constructions Pvt Ltd on 20 June, 2024
Author: Ravi V Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:22243
MFA No. 1792 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1792 OF 2021 (CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI P. VENUGOPA,L
S/O LATE C. PILLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/A SHIVASADANA,
KALKERE-AGARA MAIN ROAD,
SRI MUNESHWARA TEMPLE,
C. PILLAPPA FARMS,
KALKERE VILLAGE,
HORAMAVU POST,
BANGALORE-560 043.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI CHANDRA SHEKAR R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
GEETHAKUMARI 1. PETRA GOLD CONSTRUCTIONS PVT.LTD.,
PARLATTAYA S
Location: High Court A COMPANI INCORPORATED UNDER
of Karnataka
THE COMPANIES ACT, REPTD.
BY ITS DIRECTOR- MR. GEORGE
VARUGHESE,
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.67
RAMAKRISHNAPPA ROAD,
COX TOWN,
BANGALORE-560 005.
2. M/S. TRANSWORLD RADIO INDIA,
A REGD. SOCIETY(S/8968/78)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:22243
MFA No. 1792 of 2021
UNDER ACT, XII OF 1860,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT L-15
GREEN PARK, NEW DELHI-110 016
REPTD. BY ITS CEO-MR GEORGE PHILIP.
3. SMT. MUNIYAMMA,
W/O LATE KRISHNAPPA,
R/A KALKERE CHANNASANDRA VILLAGE,
K.R. PURAM,
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK,
(PRESENTLY BANGALORE EAST TALUK)
BANGALORE
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI K.N. PURUSHOTHAMAN, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
SMT. NAMRATHA MIRIAM GEORGE, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST
THE ORDER DATED. 18.01.2021 PASSED ON IA NO.1 IN
O.S.NO.5702/2020 ON THE FIE OF THE III ADDITIONAL CITY
CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY, REJECTING IA
NO.1 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed challenging order dated 18.01.2021 passed by III Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in O.S.no.5702/2020 on I.A.no.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' for short).
2. Sri Chandrashekar, learned counsel for appellant submitted that appellant was plaintiff in suit filed for declaration etc. In said suit, I.A.no.1 was filed for temporary injunction to -3- NC: 2024:KHC:22243 MFA No. 1792 of 2021 restrain respondent no.1 from putting up construction in plaint 'A' schedule property, during pendency of suit. It was submitted, though plaintiff had pleaded and produced records to establish prima facie case for grant of temporary injunction. Under impugned order, trial Court rejected application. It was submitted, appeal was filed challenging said order. Though appeal was admitted on 01.09.2021, there was no interim order and suit being proceeded with.
3. In above circumstances, learned counsel on instructions submitted, appellant would be satisfied if direction is issued to trial Court to expedite disposal of suit and subjecting construction put up by defendant to final outcome of suit.
4. Heard learned counsel.
5. Indeed appeal is admitted on 01.09.2021 and as trial Court records were received, suit is not being proceeded with. In view of above, it would be appropriate to dispose of appeal as sought for.
Accordingly, appeal is disposed of. Trial Court is directed to expedite disposal of suit as far as possible within outer limit -4- NC: 2024:KHC:22243 MFA No. 1792 of 2021 of one year from today by setting specific timeline for each stage of suit by avoiding grant of unnecessary adjournments.
It would be needless to observe that construction put by defendant would be subject to outcome of suit and trial Court would be at liberty to pass any appropriate orders.
In view of disposal of appeal, I.A.no.1/2021 is dismissed as unnecessary.
Sd/-
JUDGE MKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4