- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16005 WP No. 10752 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 10752 OF 2020 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. NARSIMHEGOWDA S/O LATE KALEGOWDA AGE 69 YEARS R/AT PANDAVAPURA TOWN AND TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571434 2. SMT KANTHAMMA W/O NARASIMHEGOWDA AGE 61 YEARS R/AT PANDAVAPURA TOWN AND TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571434 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K V NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE) AND: BALASUBRAMANYA S/O SIDDAIAH AGE 67 YEARS R/AT NO 36, HIRODE STREET PANADAVAPURA TOWN AND TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571434 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.PRABHUGOUD B. TUMBIGI, ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16005 WP No. 10752 of 2020 THE LEARNED ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT PANDAVAPURA IN O.S.NO.343/2016 DATED 26.09.2019 ON I.A.NO.1 AT ANNEXURE- K AND THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2020 PASSED IN M.A.NO.14/2019 BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT PANDAVAPURA AT ANNEXURE-M. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING `B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Defendant Nos.1 and 2 in O.S.No.343/2016 on the file of Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Pandavapura (trial Court) are before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 26.09.2019 passed by the Trial Court on I.A.No.I filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 restraining defendants from interfering with the use and enjoyment of the suit schedule road, which order is confirmed by order dated 03.03.2020 passed in M.A.No.14/2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Pandavapura, (First Appellate Court). 2. The above suit in O.S.No.343/2016 is filed by the plaintiff against the defendants/petitioners herein for declaration of easementary right over the suit schedule road. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16005 WP No. 10752 of 2020 The trial Court by order dated 26.09.2019 allowed the application filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC restraining the defendants from interfering and causing any obstruction in plaintiff using the suit schedule road/way. Aggrieved by the same, the defendants had preferred M.A.No.14/2019 which was dismissed. 3. The subject matter of the dispute is the road which is described in the plaint and delineated in a sketch produced at Annexure-F to the writ petition. 4. The case of the plaintiff is that except the said road, he does not have any other alternate access to his property bearing Sy.No.153/1 measuring 1 acre 7 guntas and Sy.No.152/1 measuring 26 guntas. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants referring to the written statement and the sketch produced as per Annexure-P to the writ petition submits that the suit schedule road and the sketch relied upon by the plaintiff is incorrect and misleading. In that the agreement that was entered into between the owners of neighbouring properties for the purpose of providing access to their respective properties - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16005 WP No. 10752 of 2020 did not include the property belonging to defendant No.2 and the plaintiff. 6. It is further contended that the plaintiff has independent access to his property from the eastern side as shown in the sketch at Annexure-P. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff on the other hand submit that there is no other alternate road or access to the property of the respondent/plaintiff. He refers to the averments made in paragraph 5 in the plaint to submit that except suit schedule road there is no other access or road for ingress and egress to his property. He also submits that the suit schedule road has been developed by the authorities and is being used as a public road. As such defendants cannot claim to have any exclusive right over the same. 8. Heard and perused the records. 9. The orders impugned in this writ petition are interim orders. The matter is now at the stage of cross examination of PW-2. Since the plaintiff has specifically averred in the plaint that he has no other alternate access or approach road to his - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16005 WP No. 10752 of 2020 property except the suit schedule road which aspect of the matter is taken note of by the trial Court and first appellate Court, this Court at this juncture do not find it appropriate to intervene with the order passed by the trial Court confirmed by the first appellate Court. However, making it clear that the trial Court shall independently adjudicate the dispute between the plaintiff and defendants and shall proceed in accordance with law without being influenced by the interim orders and the order passed in this writ petition. 10. Since the suit is of the year 2016, the trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of one year from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE SBN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8