Cheluvaraju vs. Somashekar Gowda
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
FRESH
Before:
Hon'ble Abhay S. Oka, Hon'ble Rajesh Bindal
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
21 Apr 2023
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.15
COURT NO.16
SECTION IV-A
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7251-7254/2023
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02-01-2023 in MFA No. 5935/2021 02-01-2023 in MFA No. 5931/2021 02-01-2023 in MFA No. 5940/2021 02-01-2023 in MFA No. 5933/2021 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bengaluru)
CHELUVARAJU & ORS.
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SOMASHEKAR GOWDA & ORS.
Respondent $(s)$
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.71964/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date: 21-04-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
For Petitioner(s) Mr. S.N. BhaT, Sr. Adv. Mr. Tarun Kr. Thakur, Adv. Mr. D. Srinivasa Navak, Adv. Ms. Parvati Bhat, Adv. Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar, AOR
For Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following $0 R D E R$
Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners.
The petitioners are the original defendant nos. 4, 6 and applied for temporary injunction in a suit for $\mathbf{Z}{\text{set}} \sim \mathbf{W}{\text{cho}}$ $\bullet$ Otecting their possession against the plaintiffs.
The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners
pointed out that an ex-parte injunction was granted by the Trial Court in favour of the plaintiffs which has now been vacated.
A perusal of the application for injunction made by the present petitioners shows that they apprehended that they will be dispossessed on the basis of the order of temporary injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs. Now the order of temporary injunction granted in favour of the plaintiffs has been vacated.
Apart from the aforesaid facts, the present petitioners could not have applied for temporary injunctions as defendants seeking a relief under Rule 1(c) of Order XXXIX of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
We find that no case for interference is made out. The Special Leave Petitions are accordingly dismissed.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(INDU MARWAH) (AVGV RAMU)
COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER(NSH)