Sri N Sreenivasa v. Sri G Santhosh Kumar

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:42849( WP(No.(20828(of(2026( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010461832026( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

TH DATED(THIS(THE(12 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(SMT.(JUSTICE(LALITHA(KANNEGANTI(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(20828(OF(2026((GM-CPC)(

BETWEEN:(( ( ,, SRI,N,SREENIVASA, AGED,ABOUT,66,YEARS,,,

S/O,R.,NARAYANA,SHETTY,,, THR/AT,NO.,296,,16 ,CROSS,,, SADASHIVANAGAR,,, BENGALURU,-,560,080,

…PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,SHERVIL,ADAPPA,,ADVOCATE), AND:( (

1., SRI,G,SANTHOSH,KUMAR,

AGED,ABOUT,35,YEARS,,, S/O,GOVINDARAJ,V.,,, Digitallytisigned NDby0SUVARNA0T R/AT,NO.,207,,2 ,H,CROSS,,, Location: KAMMANAHALLI,MAIN,ROAD,,,HIGH0COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU,-,560,084, ,

2., SRI.,R.,NARAYANA, AGED,ABOUT,69,YEARS,,, S/O,LATE,RAMAIAH,,, THR/AT,NO.,204,,7 ,CROSS,,, NEAR,WATER,TANK,,, GRUHALAKSHMI,LAYOUT,,, NELAGADARAHALLI,,NAGASANDRA,,, BENGALURU,-,560,073, ((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:42849( WP(No.(20828(of(2026( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010461832026( ( (

3., SMT.,MAHALAKSHAMMA, AGED,ABOUT,45,YEARS,, W/O,NARAYANA,N.,, R/AT,NO.,214/2,, NEAR,GANGA,INTERNATIONAL,SCHOOL,, INDIRANAGARA,,NAGASANDRA,, BENGALURU,-,560,073, ,

4., SRI.,H.,CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O,HUCHAPPA,, AGED,ABOUT,60,YEARS,, R/AT,NO.03,,MARUTHI,LAYOUT,,, NAGASANDRA,,, BENGALURU,-,560,073, ,

5., SMT.,VARALAKSHMI,N., AGED,ABOUT,51,YEARS,, W/O,H.,CHANDRASHEKAR,, R/AT,NO.03,,MARUTHI,LAYOUT,, NAGASANDRA,, BENGALURU,-,560,073, ,

6., M/S,RAJSHEKAR,DEVELOPERS,PVT.,LTD., INCORPORATED,UNDER,THE,COMPANIES,ACT,,2013, REP.,BY,ITS,DIRECTOR,, SRI.,M.,RAJASHEKARAIAH, AGED,ABOUT,66,YEARS,, S/O,LATE,MARULASIDDAIAH,, STR/AT,NO.,25,,1 ,FLOOR,, HALAGEVADERAHALLI,, RDBEML,3 ,STAGE,, RAJARAJESHWARI,NAGAR,, BENGALURU,-,560,098, …RESPONDENTS, ,,

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TOCALL FOR THE RECORDS IN O.S. NO.714/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI B. SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.10.2025 AT ANNEXURE A PASSED IN O.S. NO.714/2025 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court, aggrieved by the order dated 13.10.2025 passed on I.A. Nos.I and II in O.S. No.714/2025 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Magadi, whereby the Trial Court failed to consider I.A. Nos.I and II filed by the petitioner-plaintiff seeking an ad-interim injunction.

¶2Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit was filed for specific performance and that the petitioner had filed applications seeking an ad-interim injunction against the defendants. It is contended that the Trial Court has failed

to pass any order on the said applications and has issued summons to the defendants.

¶3It is further submitted that when an application seeking an ad-interim injunction is filed, the Court ought to have considered the same.

¶4In this regard, reliance is placed on the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Dhalitha Vividha Gramodyoga Kaigarika Sahakara Sanga Niyamitha (R) Vs Samatha Sainika Dal SSD, arising out of W.P. No. 35488/2025 (GM-CPC) dated

09.12.2025, whereby the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has observed as follows: "6. This Court does not find any need or necessity to issue notice to the respondent-defendant for the reason that the petitioner is questioning the non-passing of the order on the application in IA.No.1, wherein the trial Court has neither passed any order for grant of an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction or for rejection of the same.

¶7When an application is filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC by the plaintiff along with the plaint seeking an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction, it becomes

the duty and obligation of the trial Court to consider the same and pass suitable orders either granting or rejecting the ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction. This Court in the case of Karnataka State Cricket Association vs. Mr.Shashidhara A.V. in WP.No.33725/2025 [Decided on 17.11.2025] has made certain observations and guidelines as to how the trial Court has to deal with an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. It is not optional for the trial Court to merely issue notice to the defendant before passing an interim order of temporary injunction against the defendant.

¶8The trial Court will also have to consider judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Shiv Kumar Chadha vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and others reported in

(1993)3 SCC 161, Time City Infrastructure and Housing Limited Lucknow vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 1674 and the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vedant Fashions Pvt. Ltd., vs. Smt.Rajul Devi reported in 2014 SCC OnLine Kar 7191 while deciding the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC.

¶9It is brought to the notice of this Court that notice is yet to be served on the defendant. Therefore, it would be appropriate for this Court to direct the trial Court to decide the application either granting or rejecting an ad

interim ex parte order of temporary injunction by providing proper reasons."

¶5Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in light of the order passed in W.P.No.35488/2025(GM-CPC) referred to supra, this matter is remanded to the Trial Court, directing it to consider I.A. Nos.I and II filed by the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶6In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. The order dated 13.10.2025 passed on I.A. Nos.I and II in O.S. No.714/2025 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Magadi, is set aside. ii. The matter is remanded back to the Trial Court and directing the Trial Court shall consider and dispose of I.A. Nos.I and II in accordance with law, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. iii. Notwithstanding the fact as to whether notice has been served on the respondents or summons has

been served on the defendants or not, the Trial Court shall consider the application in accordance with law. iv. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. v. Pending IAs, if any, shall stand closed.

SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13