- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12980 WP No. 9094 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9094 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. M/S BELL PEPPER HOSPITALITY A PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING OFFICE AT NO. 797, 9TH MAIN 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU- 560 034 REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR. ASHISH KOTHARE. 2. MR. ASHISH KOTHARE S/O DR S N KOTHARE AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS. SOBHA GARNET 311, BLOCK D 6TH MAIN IBLUR, BENGALURU- 560 103. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LAKSHA KALAPPA B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BAJAJ AUTO LTD., A COMPANY HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT S.NO.51A, MUMBAI-PUNE ROAD AKURDI, PUNE-411 035 REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 ALSO, AT NO.74, 15TH CROSS ROAD JP NAGAR, 3RD PHASE SARAKKI INDUSTRIAL LAYOUT Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12980 WP No. 9094 of 2025 BENGALURU- 560 078 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. NASIR AHMED, VP (LEGAL). 2. WALL STREET LOUNGE BAR PVT. LTD. NO. 30 (OLD NO.1), 3RD FLOOR CHURCH STREET, CIVIL STATION BENGALURU -560001 REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SETTING ASIDE THE COMMON ORDER DATED: 17/02/2025 AT ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE LXXXVIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH- 89), DISMISSING THE IA NOS. 18 AND 19 IN OS NO. 768/2022 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner-defendant Nos.1 and 2 challenging the order dated 17.02.2025 passed by the LXXXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, on I.A.Nos.18 and 19 filed by the defendant Nos.1 and 2 under Section 151 of CPC, in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12980 WP No. 9094 of 2025 Com.O.S.No.768/2022, whereby the Trial Court has dismissed the said applications. 2. The plaintiff filed the suit for eviction and recovery of rent and other damages. On service of suit summons, the defendants appeared and filed written statement. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Trial Court has framed issues. The matter is posted for evidence. At this stage, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 have filed I.A.Nos.18 and 19 under Section 151 of CPC seeking for a direction to the plaintiff to deposit the sale consideration amount of Rs.9,00,000/- before the Court and direction to the plaintiff to furnish the details of movables sold by plaintiff respectively. The Trial Court, by impugned order has dismissed the said applications. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present petition is filed. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the writ papers. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12980 WP No. 9094 of 2025 4. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the defendants for recovery of unpaid rent and other damages and same is the subject matter of the suit yet to be adjudicated. 5. The grievance of the petitioners-defendants is that the plaintiff has sold the movables, which are in the suit schedule premises belonging to the defendants, for a sum of Rs.9,00,000/- and hence, the defendant Nos.1 and 2 have filed the applications seeking for a direction to the plaintiff to deposit the said amount before the Court and to furnish the list of movables sold by the plaintiff. It is not disputed by the defendants that joint inventory has been conducted by the plaintiff in their presence and the defendants have signed the said inventory. When such being the case, the defendants are well aware of the list of movables alleged to have been held in the suit schedule premises and moreover, the list of inventory has also been produced before the Trial Court. Further, when the issue in respect of relief sought by the plaintiff regarding recovery - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12980 WP No. 9094 of 2025 of unpaid rent is pending before the Trial Court, the defendants have not filed any counter claim or set off. This issue will be considered by the Trial Court at the time of final disposal of the suit. Considering all these aspects of the matter, the Trial Court has rightly rejected the applications. 6. Viewed from any angle, there is no error or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. No good grounds are made out to exercise the supervisory jurisdiction vested under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 4