Karnataka HC Transfers Mysuru Injunction Appeal To District Court, Keeping Its Interim Order In Place Until The Application Is Decided

The appellants challenged the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mysuru’s order dated 12 August 2025 allowing the respondents’ application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in O.S. No. 84/2025.

The appeal was filed under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC.

Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, as applied in the Division Bench decision in Smt. Narayanamma v. State of Karnataka, W.P. No. 17588/2024 c/w W.A. No. 200260/2025, dated 8 July 2026, formed the basis for the High Court’s conclusion that this appeal was not maintainable before it; the Division Bench decision had been affirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026 on 3 August 2026.

The appeal arose under Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC, challenging an order under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC.

The High Court applied Section 19(1) and the cited, Supreme Court-affirmed Division Bench decision to conclude that it could not adjudicate the appeal.

It did not examine the merits of the trial court’s interim-injunction order. Instead, it directed the Registry to transmit the record to the Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court, leaving all rights and contentions open.

The Registry was directed to transfer the complete record, including any pending applications, to the Principal District and Sessions Judge for assignment to the competent appellate court.

The High Court’s interim order was to continue until the District Court disposed of the application; no opinion was expressed on the merits.