An Order 43 appeal against a Senior Civil Judge’s order is not maintainable before the High Court.

The appellant filed an appeal under Order 43 Rule 1(r) CPC challenging the rejection of his application for temporary injunction under Order 39 Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC in O.S. No. 489/2024.

The High Court considered whether it could entertain the appeal under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, in light of the Division Bench decision in Smt. Narayanamma v. State of Karnataka, stated to have been affirmed by the Supreme Court.

1. Whether the High Court could entertain the appeal in view of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and the cited precedent.

2. Whether the appeal and any pending applications should be transferred to the competent District Court appellate forum.

Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, as applied in the Division Bench decision in Smt. Narayanamma v. State of Karnataka, governs the forum competent to hear the appeal.

The High Court relied on that decision, which it noted had been affirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026.

Applying Section 19(1) and the cited precedent, the Court held that the appeal was not maintainable before it.

Rather than determine the appeal on its merits, it directed transfer of the record to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, who could assign it to the appellate court having jurisdiction; any pending applications were also to be transferred for consideration in accordance with law.

It directed the Registry to transfer the case record, including any pending applications, to the concerned Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court.

The Court made no observation on the merits and left all parties’ rights and contentions open.