- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 21402 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: MR. YOUNUS KHAN, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O MR. AZEEM KHAN, NO. 34, 1 MAIN, 1ST CROSS, S.R.K GARDEN, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.T. INDU SHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MRS. DILSHAD BEGUM, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/O LATE MR. MOHAMMED MAHABOOB, 2. MR. MOHAMMED AKRAM TAJ, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, S/O LATE MR. MOHAMMED MAHABOOB 3. MR. MOHAMMED SARTAJ AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS S/O LATE MR MOHAMMED MAHABOOB 4. MRS. YASMEEN BEGUM AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS D/O LATE MR MOHAMMED MAHABOOB Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 5. MRS. AYESHA BEGUM AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS D/O LATE MR MOHAMMED MAHABOOB, THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 19, 8TH MAIN 3RD CROSS, BTM LAYOUT I STAGE, TAVAREKERE, BENGALURU - 560 029. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. OMRAN KHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DATED 12.03.2019 AT ANNX-H PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MAGADI, RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT, ON MEMO AT ANNX-G IN O.S.NO.288/2018 AND CONSEQUENTLY, EXTEND THE AD-INTERIM ORDER GRANTED ON 14.11.2018 TILL DISPOSAL OF I.A.NO.1 ON MERITS AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. Aggrieved by the order dated 12.03.2019, passed in O.S.No.288/2018, wherein the Trial Court has refused to extend the ex parte ad interim order granted in favour of the plaintiff therein, he has preferred the present writ petition. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 2. The petitioner preferred O.S.No.288/2018 with the following prayers; "WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff humbly prays that this Hon'ble court be pleased to grant the judgment and decree in the following manner: Decree cancelling the Sale Deed dated 18.06.2012 executed by Mr. Younous Khan through his General Power of Attorney Holder Mr. Mr. Mohammed Mahaboob in favour of Mr. Mohammed Mahaboob which is duly registered as Document No.BTM-1- 00640-2012-13, Book -1, estored in CD. No.BTMD42, at the office of Sub-Registrar, Jayanagar (BTM Layout), Bengaluru; and consequently, declare the Plaintiff as the absolute owner of the Schedule Property; b) A Decree of Permanent Injunction, restraining the Defendants, their men, agents and any other person/s cause or claim through them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Schedule Property or from dealing with the Suit Schedule Property in any marrier whatsoever, c) Grant Costs: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 d) Such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity." 3. He has also preferred an interlocutory application under Order VII Rule 1 of C.P.C., and the Trial Court has passed the following order; "Heard the Counsel for the Plaintiff on IA No 1 Considering the nature of the suit and the facts and circumstances of the case, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The defendants their men, agents and other persons are hereby restrained from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by an order of temporary injunction till next date of hearing. The plaintiff shall comply the order 39 rule 3(a) of CPC in respect of Temporary Injunction against the defendants submit the affidavit. Issue suit summons to defendants through Court. Call on by 14.12.2018." - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 4. Thereafter, the respondents entered appearance and filed a memo dated 12.03.2019 before the Trial Court, wherein it is alleged that the petitioner has installed a board stating that the property belongs to him and on the said ground, the Trial Court has refused to extend the interim order. 5. The case of the petitioner is that the said board was installed by the petitioner even prior to filing of the suit and even otherwise, there was no bar in the order of the Trial Court restraining him from installing the said board and that the Trial Court, without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, has refused extension of the interim order. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent is absent. 7. On 12.03.2019, the Trial Court has passed the following order; - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 "Appln u/o 7.R.11(a) CPC filed [I.A.No.2] Memo filed by the counsel Sri. NPS with NOC Vak for deft producing photograph of the ssp where the Plaintiff has put up board stating he is the owner of the ssp. The order of the Court was not only with respect to the defts not to interfere in the ssp. Hence considering the behavior of the plf, the memo filed for extn of T.I cannot be considered and both parties are directed to hear on the IA by next date and for objections on IA No.2. Call on 1/4." 8. It is seen from the order passed on the earlier occasion by the Trial Court on 15.11.2018, there is no such restriction imposed on the petitioner, wherein he has been prohibited from installing the board. Even otherwise, it is the contention of the petitioner that the board was in existence prior to filing of the suit. Under the said circumstances, the Trial Court ought to have continued the ex parte interim order granted in favour of the petitioner till the interlocutory application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C., was heard. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 9. This Court by an interim order dated 10.05.2019 has passed an order of ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property till the next date of hearing and the said interim order has been continued. 10. Under the said circumstances, I am of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the interim order granted by the Trial Court is continued till the Trial Court hears the application filed by the petitioner under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C, and take decision on the said interlocutory application or decide the original suit itself on merits. Hence, the following; ORDER (i) The impugned order dated 12.03.2019 passed by the Trial Court refusing to extend the exparte ad interim injunction granted in favour of the petitioner / plaintiff is hereby set-aside. (ii) The interim order granted by the Trial Court is extended till the Trial Court hears and takes - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:15113 WP No. 21402 of 2019 the decision on the application filed by the petitioner under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C. (iii) It is hereby made clear that no opinion has been expressed on the merits of the case. The Trial Court without being influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove shall independently decide the application filed by the petitioner based on the material placed before it. (iv) Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2 CT: BHK