Case Note & Summary
The appellant, M/s Bagmane Constructions Pvt. Ltd., was the 11th defendant in a civil suit (O.S.No.4743/2012) pending before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore. The suit involved a dispute over suit schedule property. On 21.10.2013, the trial court passed an order on I.A.No.9 directing both parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit schedule property. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant filed the present miscellaneous first appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court, after hearing the learned counsel for both sides, noted that the appeal was listed for orders but with consent of the advocates, it was taken up for final disposal. The court observed that the trial court had exercised its discretion judiciously and the order of status quo was just and proper. The High Court found no grounds to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the appeal. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment. The judgment was delivered by Justice Aravind Kumar on 13th November 2013.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Interim Orders - Status Quo - Order 43 Rule 1(r) r/w Section 151 CPC - Appeal against status quo order - The appellant, defendant No.11, challenged the trial court's order dated 21.10.2013 directing both parties to maintain status quo in respect of suit schedule property - The High Court held that the trial court had exercised its discretion judiciously and the order was just and proper - The appeal was dismissed as the status quo order was necessary to protect the interests of both parties pending disposal of the suit (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's order directing both parties to maintain status quo in respect of suit schedule property pending disposal of the suit was justified and should be interfered with in appeal.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's order of status quo. The court directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment.
Law Points
- Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC
- Section 151 CPC
- Status Quo Order
- Interim Injunction
- Balance of Convenience
- Prima Facie Case
Case Details
2013 LawText (KAR) (11) 16
Miscellaneous First Appeal No.9311/2013 (CPC)
Sri.Udaya Holla, Senior Counsel for Sri. Shashikiran Shetty K, Associates, Advocates (for appellant); Sri. R.Vishwanath Rao, Advocate for R-1
M/s Bagmane Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
Sri. D. Digambarnath and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeal against an interim order of status quo passed by the trial court in a property suit.
Remedy Sought
The appellant (defendant No.11) sought to set aside the trial court's order dated 21.10.2013 directing both parties to maintain status quo in respect of suit schedule property.
Filing Reason
The appellant was aggrieved by the trial court's order of status quo and filed the appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) r/w Section 151 CPC.
Previous Decisions
The trial court had passed an order on I.A.No.9 in O.S.No.4743/2012 on 21.10.2013 directing both parties to maintain status quo in respect of suit schedule property.
Issues
Whether the trial court's order of status quo was justified and should be upheld.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the trial court's order of status quo was erroneous and should be set aside.
The respondents supported the trial court's order and argued that it was just and proper.
Ratio Decidendi
The trial court had exercised its discretion judiciously in passing the status quo order, and there were no grounds to interfere with it in appeal. The order was just and proper to maintain the subject matter of the suit pending disposal.
Judgment Excerpts
This appeal is by defendant No.11 of O.S.No.4743/2012 directed against the order of status-quo passed by trial Court on 21.10.2013.
The trial Court has exercised its discretion judiciously and the order passed by it is just and proper.
Accordingly, appeal stands dismissed. Trial Court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible at any rate within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
Procedural History
The appellant (defendant No.11) filed Miscellaneous First Appeal No.9311/2013 under Order 43 Rule 1(r) r/w Section 151 CPC against the order dated 21.10.2013 passed by the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore on I.A.No.9 in O.S.No.4743/2012, which directed both parties to maintain status quo in respect of suit schedule property. The appeal was heard and disposed of on 13.11.2013.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 43 Rule 1(r), Section 151
