PANDURANGA Vs. NAGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the orders passed in M.A.Nos.3/2025 and 4/2025 dtd. 1/9/2025 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Haliyal at Haliyal, Uttara Kannada.

(2.) The petitioners herein are the defendant Nos.1 to 5 in the suit. The respondent Nos.1 to 3 had filed O.S.No.290/2024 against the defendants seeking relief of permanent injunction with respect to the suit property. In the suit, both the plaintiffs and defendants had filed applications under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 R/w Sec. 151 of CPC. I.A.No.I is filed by the plaintiffs seeking ad-interim temporary injunction against the defendants restraining them from obstructing the peaceful possession, use and enjoyment of the plaintiffs over the suit schedule property till disposal of the suit. The defendants had filed I.A.No.V under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 R/w Sec. 151 of CPC against the plaintiffs seeking ad-interim temporary injunction against the plaintiffs restraining them from obstructing the peaceful possession, use and enjoyment of the defendants in and over the suit properties by way of construction till the disposal of the suit.

(3.) The trial Court by order dtd. 25/2/2025 had dismissed I.A.No.I filed by the plaintiffs and allowed I.A.No.V filed by the defendants. While passing the said order, the trial Court had observed that the plaintiffs' claims to own the suit property through a Registered Sale Deed and are in actual possession. After the incident, the defendants continued to cause disturbance and obstruction. According to the defendants, they are farming 5 acres of agricultural land, which they claim belong to their ancestors and they are cultivating the land since 1924 without interference from the original owner. In the year 1976, Mr. Mahadevappa S/o Holayappa Harijan sought to enter his name in the revenue records which was rejected. Thereafter, the defendants' father challenged the denial before the High Court of Karnataka in WP.No.3080-3080A/1980. After hearing both side arguments, the High Court ordered the Land Tribunal to conduct fresh enquiry, which subsequently rejected the application through order dtd. 26/5/1994.