SHAKUNTHALAMMA Vs. KANTHAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are placed before us by the Hon'ble Chief Justice on the request of the Learned Single Judge to refer the following question to a larger Bench for consideration:

(2.) W.P. No. 58906/2013 is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 499/2010, a suit instituted on 02.12.2010 before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.), Chitradurga for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The plaintiffs also sought interim order of temporary injunction by filing an application under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC but, the Court passed an exparte order on 3.12.2010 to maintain status-quo, till appearance of the defendants. On service of summons, the defendants appeared on 1.10.2011 and the 3rd defendant, on 9.8.2012, filed I.A. No. 11 under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC seeking an order of temporary injunction restraining the plaintiffs from disturbing his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. The learned Civil Judge by order dated 16.01.2013 dismissed I.A. No. 11 filed by the 3rd defendant under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. Aggrieved by the same, the 3rd defendant preferred I.A. No. 12/2013 and the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Chitradurga, while allowing the appeal set aside the order of dismissal of I.A. No. 11 and granted an order of temporary injunction against the plaintiffs. Aggrieved by the said order the plaintiffs have filed the writ petition.

(3.) W.P. No. 16412/2014, is filed by the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 19/2012, a suit filed on 18.06.2012 for a declaration that they are the lawful owners in peaceful possession and enjoyment of suit properties and for a decree of permanent injunction. The plaintiffs had also maintained I.A. for temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. After service of summons, the defendants entered appearance. On 13.06.2013, the 1st defendant too filed I.A. under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC for an order of temporary injunction to restrain the plaintiffs from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of item No. 1 of the suit schedule. The trial Court after hearing the parties, while dismissing the I.A., for temporary injunction filed both by the plaintiffs and the 1st defendant, directed them to maintain status-quo in respect of the suit schedule properties till the disposal of the suit. Aggrieved by the dismissal of I.A. No. 7, the 1st defendant preferred M.A. 16/2013 before the District Court, Chitradurga. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chitradurga by order dated 24.01.2014, allowed the appeal, set aside the order of the trial Court and granted temporary injunction restraining the plaintiffs from interfering with the 1st defendant's peaceful possession and enjoyment of 1st item of the suit schedule, by allowing I.A. No. 7. Aggrieved by the same the plaintiffs have preferred the writ petition.