HANUMANTHAIAH Vs. JAYALAKSHMAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Abhinav Anand, learned Advocate appearing for petitioner and perused the records.

(2.) Writ petitioner is first defendant in O.S. No. 226 of 2013 and respondent herein is the plaintiff. Plaintiff filed the suit for perpetual injunction against first defendant and four others contending inter alia that suit schedule property belonged to one late Sri Murarappa and on his demise, his wife and children have executed among themselves a Panchayat partition of the properties including suit schedule properties on 10-9-1996; beneficiary under the said partition Sri Byranna had sold suit schedule property in favour of plaintiff under registered sale deed dated 23-9-1999 and thereafter, plaintiff had obtained mutation of revenue records and has been in possession and enjoyment of the same. In support of her claim, plaintiff furnished revenue records including RTC extracts of the suit schedule property. Said suit was clubbed along with O.S. No. 184 of 2012 which was filed by writ petitioner along with one Sri Arasaiah for declaration, perpetual injunction and in the alternate to direct fifth defendant to hand over possession of the same.

(3.) In the suit filed by respondent herein i.e., O.S. No. 226 of 2013, an application came to be filed by plaintiff under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for grant of temporary injunction and Trial Court on appreciation of rival contentions, found that plaintiff has satisfied three ingredients for grant of temporary injunction namely, prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss and injury that would be caused to plaintiff, if an order of injunction is refused and as such, by order dated 12-11-2014 (Annexure-B) Trial Court allowed said application and granted an order of temporary injunction in favour of plaintiff. Unsuccessful first defendant carried the matter in appeal M.A. No. 5 of 2015 and First Appellate Court on re-appreciation of entire facts and material produced by respective parties, affirmed the order passed by Trial Court and dismissed the appeal by order dated 6-7-2015 (Annexure-A) which orders are impugned in the present writ petition.