S. M. NAVEEN KUMAR Vs. C. ANASUYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents, and perused the impugned order dated 22.2.2017

(2.) The respondent No.1 - plaintiff in O.S.No.4258/2016 on the file of the LIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (for short, 'the civil Court') filed two applications (IA No. I and II) under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure for temporary injunction. While one of the applications by the respondent No.1 is for temporary injunction restraining the appellant and the respondent No.2 from alienating the suit schedule property, the other application by the respondent No.1 is for temporary injunction restraining the aforesaid persons from interfering with her possession of the suit schedule Property. The civil Court by the impugned order dated.22.2.2017 has allowed these applications. Further, appellant's application (IA No. III) for appointment of a Receiver to collect the rents from the lessees in use and occupation of the schedule property is also rejected by the civil Court by the impugned order dated 22.2.2017. As such, the appellant has filed these appeals; the appeal in MFA No. 2273/2017 is against the impugned order insofar as applications filed by the respondent No.1 being allowed, and the MFA No.2274/2017 is against the impugned order rejecting the application by the appellant.

(3.) The respondent No.1 purchased the subject property under the sale deed dated 17.7.1980, and she later transferred the same in favour of her father, Sri.D.G.Gunde Gowda, under the Sale Deed dated 19.5.2000. Her father, Sri D.G.Gunde Gowda later transferred the subject property jointly in favour of the respondent No.1 and his son, the respondent No.2 herein. These transactions are not disputed.