- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:338 WP No. 12038 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 12038 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: A NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS S/O LATE APPANNAPPA R/AT BIJJAWARA VILLAGE VIJAYAPURA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562110. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. R CHANDRANNA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIHANUMAPPA 2. SRI GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS S/O M VENKATAPPA BOTH ARE RESIDING AT BIJJAWARA VILLAGE, VIJAYAPURA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 110. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI . S VENUGOPAL., ADVOCATE AND SRI. MUNEGOWDA N M, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2) Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:338 WP No. 12038 of 2021 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 03.01.2020 MADE IN M.A.NO.15031/2019 BY THE COURT OF DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, AT DEVANAHALLI, (ANNEXURE- A) AND THE ORDER DATED 17.12.2016 MADE AN I.A.NO.1 IN O.S.NO.578/2011 BY THE COURT OF ADDL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT DEVANAHALLI AT ANNEXURES-B THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed by the plaintiff under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 03.01.2020 passed in M.A.No.15031/2019 by the District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Devanahalli, whereby the trial court confirmed the order dated 17.12.2016 passed on IA No.1 in O.S.No.587/2011 by the Court of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli, rejecting the interim injunction sought by the plaintiff. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit for injunction restraining the defendants from dis-possessing the petitioner/plaintiff - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:338 WP No. 12038 of 2021 from the suit schedule property, without due process of law. 3. Admittedly, the suit schedule properties were originally granted in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the defendant. After the coming into force of the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 (for short, ‘PTCL Act’), the legal representatives of the original grantee have filed an application before the Assistant Commissioner under Sections 4 and 6 of the PTCL Act. The Assistant Commissioner, by order, dated 22.09.1997 allowed the application and directed to restore the possession of the suit schedule property in favour of the defendant. Thereafter, there is no order passed under Rule 6 for resumption of the land in favour of the legal representatives of original grantee. Since the petitioner/plaintiff has not been dispossessed without due process of law, he has filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:338 WP No. 12038 of 2021 the plaintiff from the suit schedule property other than the due process of law. In the said suit, he filed IA No.1 for ad-interim order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from dispossessing the plaintiff till the disposal of the suit. The trial court dismissed the said application, which is confirmed by the appellate court in M.A.No.15031/2019. Being aggrieved, petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court. 4. Now, the suit is pending before the trial court for consideration. Under these circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is suffice for this Court to direct the parties to maintain status-quo in respect of the suit schedule property. 5. Accordingly, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 17.12.2016 passed on IA No.1 in O.S.No.578/2011 by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Devanahalli and the order dated 03.01.2020 passed in M.A.No.15031/ - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:338 WP No. 12038 of 2021 2019 by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Devanahalli are set aside. (iii) Both the parties are directed to maintain status-quo in respect of the suit schedule property, till the disposal of the suit. (iv) The trial court is directed to dispose of the suit, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to both the parties, without being influenced by the observations made in the course of this order. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 58