Case Note & Summary
The miscellaneous first appeals arose from a common order dated 2020-02-19 passed in Original Suit No. 2 of 2016 by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar, allowing an application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The plaintiffs, twenty-five individuals claiming to be hereditary archakas known as 'Upadhivantas' of Shree Samsthana Mahabaleshwara Deva Temple, Gokarna, alleged hereditary pooja rights and the right to collect dakshinas from devotees. They filed the suit seeking compensation of Rs. 5,70,000 with interest and a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with their performance of pooja, tantrikatana, and upadhi rites. The defendants included the temple itself, Shri Ramachandrapura Matha, its Peetadhipathi, and the Kshetra Upadhivanta Mandal. The suit was originally instituted as Original Suits No. 20 of 2014 and 22 of 2014 before the Senior Civil Judge, Kumta, but was transferred to the District Court at Karwar following a High Court order in Writ Petition No. 59527 of 2015, where it was renumbered as O.S. No. 2 of 2016. During the suit, the plaintiffs filed an interim application seeking temporary injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with their pooja rights. The trial court allowed the application, prompting the defendants to file the present appeals under Section 104 read with Order XLIII Rule 1(r) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court, after hearing senior counsel for all parties, reserved judgment. The excerpt of the judgment does not contain the court's analysis, findings, or final decision, making it impossible to ascertain the outcome of the appeals.
Issue of Consideration
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (08) 53
MFA No.100918/2020 (GM-CPC) connected with MFA No.101088/2020
K.G. Raghavan, Prashant F. Goudar, Akshay A. Katti, S.S. Naganand, A.P. Hegde Janmane, Vijay M. Malali
MFA 100918/2020: Shree Samsthana Mahabaleshwara Deva Gokarna, Shri Ramachandrapura Matha (represented by Shree Raghaveshwara Bharathi Swamiji), and Shri Krishna son of Ganesh Bhat; MFA 101088/2020: Shri Kshetra Upadhivanta Mandal (Registered), Gokarna, represented by its Secretary Balakrishna Ganapati Jambhe Vaidik
U.F.M. Ananthraj son of Dattatreya Adi and 24 others (plaintiffs in the original suit); in MFA 101088/2020 additionally respondents 26-28 include the appellants of MFA 100918/2020
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil suit for damages and permanent injunction, accompanied by an interim application for temporary injunction, concerning alleged hereditary pooja rights in a temple.
Remedy Sought
Plaintiffs sought compensation of Rs. 5,70,000 with interest at 12% per annum, permanent injunction restraining defendants from interfering with their performance of pooja, tantrikatana, and upadhi rites, and during the suit, temporary injunction to the same effect.
Filing Reason
Plaintiffs claimed to be hereditary archakas (Upadhivantas) of the temple with hereditary pooja rights and the right to collect dakshinas, and alleged interference by the defendants.
Previous Decisions
The suit was originally filed as O.S. No.20/2014 and 22/2014 before Senior Civil Judge, Kumta; transferred to Principal District and Sessions Judge, Karwar as O.S. No.2/2016 by High Court order in WP No.59527/2015; trial court allowed IA No.1 for temporary injunction on 2020-02-19.
Judgment Excerpts
If a man seeks unity in deity, then he must necessarily learn to seek unity with the interests of the world also and has to work with it and should learn to live in peace & harmony.
These appeals are directed against order dated 19.02.2020 passed on IA.I in O.S.No.2/2016 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Uttara Kannada, Karwar.
Procedural History
Plaintiffs filed suits O.S. No.20/2014 and 22/2014 before Senior Civil Judge, Kumta. Transfer petition rejected by District Court, but High Court in WP No.59527/2015 transferred suits to Principal District and Sessions Judge, Karwar, renumbered as O.S. No.2/2016. Plaintiffs filed IA No.1 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC. Trial court allowed the application on 2020-02-19. Defendants filed the present appeals under Section 104 read with Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC. High Court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 2020-08-24.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Section 104, Order XLIII Rule 1(r), Order XXXIX Rule 1, Order XXXIX Rule 2
