1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 31 ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2013

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE

WRIT PETITION No. 63606/2010 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

1. SHRI HANAMANT SIDDAPPA DALAWAI AGE 60 YEARS, ACC AGRIL R/O. SASALATTI 587315 TQ. DIST. .

2. SHRI MAHADEV HANAMANT DALAWAI AGE 35 YEARS, OCC AGRI., R/O SASALATTI - 587315 TQ. JAMAKHANDI DIST. BAGALKOT.

3. SHRI SHRISHAIL HANAMATN DALAWAI AGE 30 YEARS, OCC. AGRI., R/O. SASALATTI - 587315 TQ. JAMAKHANDI DIST. BAGALKOT.

4. SHRI IRAPPA HANAMANT DALAWAI AGE 60 YERS, OCC AGRI., R/O. SASALATTI - 587315 TQ. JAMAKHANDI DIST. BAGALKOT. ... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI M. G. NAGANURI, ADVOCATE) 2

AND :

1. SMT. GOURAWA W/O. KALLAPPA DALAWAI AGE 41 YEARS, OCC AGRI., R/O. SASALATTI - 587315 TQ. JAMAKHANDI DIST. BAGALKOT.

2. SHRI DUNDAPPA BALAPPA MALLI AGE 27 YEARS, OCC. AGRI., R/O. SASALATTI - 587315 TQ. JAMAKHANDI DIST. BAGALKOT. ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 )

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF , PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 09/10/2009 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) JAMAKHANDI IN MA 4/2008 AND MA 5/2008 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-F AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

PC :

This writ petition is directed against concurrent findings on facts recorded by the Courts below while dealing with and disposing of the application for temporary injunction under

Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code 3

of Civil Procedure, 1908. By this application, the respondents

– plaintiffs sought injunction against the defendants restraining them from disturbing their possession over R.S.

No.29/2B situated at Sasalatti village, and restraining them from allowing the plaintiffs to enjoy their share in the suit well.

Both the Courts below after having considered the entire material on record granted the injunction. There is no dispute that the order of injunction is running against the petitioner since 17.03.2008. Keeping that in view and for the reasons recorded in the impugned order, I find no case warranting interference at this stage is made out. Hence, the petition is dismissed.

SD/- JUDGE

hnm/-