Karnataka High CourtCivil Procedure and EvidenceAdministrative and Public Law

Karnataka HC Transfers Two Injunction Appeals To District Court As Not Maintainable, Keeps Interim Order In Force Until Application Is Decided

SHRI M V NAGARAJUv.SMT RATHNAMMA

Karnataka HC Transfers Two Injunction Appeals To District Court As Not Maintainable, Keeps Interim Order In Force Until Application Is Decided. SHRI M V NAGARAJU vs SMT RATHNAMMA. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the appeals against the interlocutory order were maintainable before the High Court under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964.

The court held

The Court held that the appeals were not maintainable before it and disposed of them for statistical purposes.

It also directed

It directed transfer of the records and any pending applications to the competent District Court, with the parties to appear before the District Judge on 20 November 2026 without further notice.

The interim order granted by the High Court was to continue until disposal of the application before the District Court; no opinion was expressed on the merits.

01Facts

The appeals arose from an order dated 17 August 2022 on an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure in O.S. No. 192/2021 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sidlaghatta.

pp. 2–4

Rathnamma appealed against the order partly allowing the application; M.V. Nagaraju filed the connected appeal challenging the order allowing it.

pp. 2–4

The High Court considered the appeals’ maintainability and directed their transfer to the competent District Court.

p. 5

02Issues

i.1. Whether the appeals against the interlocutory order were maintainable before the High Court under Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964.

p. 5

ii.2. If not maintainable before the High Court, whether the appeals and any pending applications should be transferred to the competent appellate court for adjudication.

pp. 5–6

03Law Applied

The Court relied on Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, and 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, which the Supreme Court had affirmed in SLP(C) No. 025075/2026 on 3 August 2026.

p. 5

The Court treated these authorities as establishing that the appeals were not maintainable before it and should be placed before the competent District Court for adjudication.

p. 5

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Section 151

KARNATAKA CIVIL COURTS ACT, 1964 Section 19

04Reasoning

Applying Section 19(1) and the cited Narayanamma decision, the Court concluded that it could not adjudicate these appeals.

p. 5

It therefore directed the Registry to transmit the records to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, who could assign them to the appellate court with jurisdiction.

pp. 5–6

Any pending applications were also to be transferred for consideration according to law.

pp. 5–6

The Court expressly left the merits and the parties’ contentions open.

pp. 5–6

05Holding

The Court held that the appeals were not maintainable before it and disposed of them for statistical purposes.

pp. 6–7

It directed transfer of the records and any pending applications to the competent District Court, with the parties to appear before the District Judge on 20 November 2026 without further notice.

pp. 6–7

The interim order granted by the High Court was to continue until disposal of the application before the District Court; no opinion was expressed on the merits.

pp. 6–7
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SHRI M V NAGARAJUvsSMT RATHNAMMA

Karnataka High Court · October 13, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment