Karnataka HC Routes Injunction Appeal Through District Court, Holding MFA Not Maintainable Under Civil Courts Act

The appellants filed an appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC challenging the trial court’s order dated 13 February 2025, which rejected their application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC and allowed the respondents’ application under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC.

On hearing the matter, the High Court considered whether it could entertain the appeal in light of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 and the authorities cited in its judgment.

Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, as interpreted in Smt. Narayanamma v. State of Karnataka, W.P. No. 17588 of 2024 c/w W.A. No. 200260 of 2025 (8 July 2026), governed the appeal’s maintainability before the High Court; the Division Bench judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026 on 3 August 2026.

The High Court applied that authority to conclude that this appeal was not maintainable before it and directed transfer to the competent appellate court.

The High Court treated the cited Division Bench decision, affirmed by the Supreme Court, as controlling on the maintainability question and held that Section 19(1) prevented it from entertaining the appeal.

Rather than determine the challenge to the trial court’s injunction order, it directed that the record—and any pending applications—be transferred for adjudication by the competent appellate court, expressly leaving the merits and the parties’ contentions open.

It directed the Registry to transfer the entire record to the concerned Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court, including any pending applications; it made no observation on the merits and left all rights and contentions open.

The matter was listed before the District Court on 30 November 2026.