SRI. B v. RAMAMURTHY S
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1349 OF 2025 (CPC) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1354 OF 2025 C/W IN MFA No. 1349/2025 BETWEEN: M/S. SREE SAI LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.8, CORPORATION MARK, SUSHEELA ROAD, MAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI. B. R. DWARAKANATH
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE) APPELLANT AND: 1. SRI. R. VENKATESH S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA SHETTY, AGED 65 YEARS, R/AT PENT HOUSE, 7 HILLS, SOHAN TOWERS, NO. 41/1, 30TH CROSS, SBI BANK BUILDING, 7TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 004. 2. MR. C. PRASANNA S/O MR. A. CHENNAIAH, Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 AGED 63 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1063, 8TH B CROSS ROAD, DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, GIRINAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 085. 3. MR. B.R. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O SRI. B. RAMAKRISHNAIAH, AGED 75 YEARS, R/AT NO. P 2, 4TH FLOOR, 34TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN ROAD. 1781 DEVAGIRI MEADOWS, KADARENAHALLI PARK, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 070. 4. MR. T.V.T.PRAKASH S/O MR.H. VEERANNA, AGED 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1132, 18TH CROSS ROAD, 24TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 070. 5. SRI. K.L. VENKATESH BABU S/O SRI. K.V. LAKSHMINARYA SETTY, AGED 61 YEARS, GENERAL MERCHANTS, BAZAR ROAD, CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101. 6. DR. SURENDRA KUMAR SHARMA S/O SRI. RAMA SHARMA, AGED 56 YEARS, R/AT NO. 7, VIVEKANANDA STREET, UDAY NAGAR, BANGALORE- 560 016. 7. SRI. B. NARENDRA BABU, S/O SRI. BASAPPA, AGED 41 YEARS, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 R/AT NO. 57/2, BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, BANNERAGHATTA POST, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 083. 8. SRI. B. V. RAMAMURTHY S/O SRI. B. VENKATASWAMY, AGED 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 453/9, 40TH CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 010 9. SRI. K.R. VISHWANATH GUPTA S/O LATE. K. RAMACHANDRA GUPTA, AGED 66 YEARS, R/AT NO. 23, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, MARUTHI EXTENSION, SRIRAMPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 021 10. SRI. N. UDAYKUMAR S/O SRI. NAGA MANICKAM CHETTIAR, AGED 61 YEARS, R/AT NO. 257, BAZAR STREET, HARUR, CHARMAPURI (D) TAMIL NADU – 636 903. (BY SRI. DHANANJAYJOSHI SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI. NAVEED AHMED ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) …RESPONDENTS THIS MFA FILED U/O. 43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 05.02.2025 PASSED ON IA NO.2 IN O.S. NO. 1078/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL, DISMISSING IA NO.2 FILED U/O. 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 IN MFA NO. 1354/2025 BETWEEN: M/S. SREE SAI LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.8, CORPORATION MARK, SUSHEELA ROAD, MAVALLI, BENGALURU - 560 004. REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI. B. R. DWARAKANATH (BY SRI. M.B. CHANDRACHOODA, ADVOCATE) APPELLANT AND: 1. SRI. R. VENKATESH S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA SHETTY, AGED 65 YEARS, R/AT PENT HOUSE, 7 HILLS, SOHAN TOWERS, NO. 41/1, 30TH CROSS, SBI BANK BUILDING, 7TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 004. 2. MR. C. PRASANNA S/O MR. A. CHENNAIAH, AGED 63 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1063, 8TH B CROSS ROAD, DR. RAJENDRA PRASAD ROAD, GIRINAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 085. 3. MR. B.R. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O SRI. B. RAMAKRISHNAIAH, AGED 75 YEARS, R/AT NO. P 2, 4TH FLOOR, 34TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN ROAD. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 1781 DEVAGIRI MEADOWS, KADARENAHALLI PARK, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 070. 4. MR. T.V.T.PRAKASH S/O MR.H. VEERANNA, AGED 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1132, 18TH CROSS ROAD, 24TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 070. 5. SRI. K.L. VENKATESH BABU S/O SRI. K.V. LAKSHMINARYA SETTY, AGED 61 YEARS, GENERAL MERCHANTS, BAZAR ROAD, CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101. 6. DR. SURENDRA KUMAR SHARMA S/O SRI. RAMA SHARMA, AGED 56 YEARS, R/AT NO. 7, VIVEKANANDA STREET, UDAY NAGAR, BANGALORE- 560 016. 7. SRI. B. NARENDRA BABU, S/O SRI. BASAPPA, AGED 41 YEARS, R/AT NO. 57/2, BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, BANNERAGHATTA POST, JIGANI HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 083. 8. SRI. B. V. RAMAMURTHY S/O SRI. B. VENKATASWAMY, AGED 62 YEARS, R/AT NO. 453/9, 40TH CROSS, 2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 010 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 9. SRI. K.R. VISHWANATH GUPTA S/O LATE. K. RAMACHANDRA GUPTA, AGED 66 YEARS, R/AT NO. 23, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD CROSS, MARUTHI EXTENSION, SRIRAMPURAM, BANGALORE - 560 021 10. SRI. N. UDAYKUMAR S/O SRI. NAGA MANICKAM CHETTIAR, AGED 61 YEARS, R/AT NO. 257, BAZAR STREET, HARUR, CHARMAPURI (D) TAMIL NADU – 636 903. (BY SRI. DHANANJAYJOSHI SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI. NAVEED AHMED ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) …RESPONDENTS THIS MFA FILED UNDER ORDER 43 RULE 1(r) OF CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.02.2025 PASSED ON I.A. NO. 1 IN O.S.NO. 1078/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL, DISMISSING THE I.A. NO.1 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF CPC. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT These two appeals are filed by the plaintiff being aggrieved by the order passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of CPC - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 in OS.No.1078/2019 dated 05.02.2025 on the file of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal. 2. The rank of the parties is referred to as per their rankings before the trial Court. 3. It is the case of the plaintiff that, defendant No.1 is the Director of plaintiff’s Company. There was an agreement between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 dated 22.11.1996 that the lands are purchased in the name of defendant No.1, but money was paid by the plaintiff and thereafter, getting conversion of land and after formation of sites, agreed to transfer sites in favour of plaintiff’s Company. But thereafter, defendant No.1 had refused to transfer sites/lands in favour of the plaintiff resulting into filing of suit by the plaintiff seeking declaration and permanent injunction. 4. The plaintiff had filed the above said I.A.Nos.1 and 2 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of CPC praying to restrain the defendants from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit schedule - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 property and not to allow the lands/sites to be transferred in favour of third parties, but the said applications were rejected by the trial Court, on the reason that, though, the agreement is dated 22.11.1996, but the suit is filed in the year 2019, therefore, there is delay. Furthermore, by the very claim that the plaintiff has failed to prove possession over the land, therefore, dismissed the said applications as the plaintiff has failed to make out a prima facie case. 5. Upon considering the filing of suit as per the plaint averments produced along with the appeal, the entire framing of suit is touching upon the provisions of the Benami Transaction Act, 1988. Making out of prima facie should be always as per law, but not opposing the law. The mutual agreement between the plaintiff and defendant No.1 is according to their mutual understanding. Therefore, when the entire suit may be in the context of provisions of Benami Transactions Act, - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 therefore, the plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case. 6. Furthermore, from the very pleadings of the plaintiff, the plaintiff is not in possession of the property. Therefore, when the plaintiff is not able to make out a prima facie case, therefore, there is no need to make interference in the order passed by the trial Court and that the order passed by the trial court is correct. 7. At the most, if there is any violation of terms of agreement dated 22.11.1996, then the plaintiff ought to have filed the suit for recovery of amount paid. Therefore, the reasons given by the trial Court are correct and proper. Hence, there is no need to make interference in the order passed by the trial Court. Therefore, appeals are liable to be dismissed. However, the trail court shall not be influenced by the observations made above while - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:10338 MFA No. 1349 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1354 of 2025 considering the suit on merits. The observations made above are only for considering the instant appeals. 8. Hence, I proceed to pass the following (i) The appeals are dismissed. (ii) The impugned order dated 05.02.2025 passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 r/w Section 151 of CPC in OS.No.1078/2019 on the file of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Anekal, is hereby confirmed. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48