- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18462 WP No. 11555 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 11555 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. DR K SENTHILNATHAN SON OF LATE KANAGASABAI CHETTIAR, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, OCCUPATION: DOCTOR MUNICIPAL OLD NO.5 NEW MUNICIPAL NO.29, HMT MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE 560013 AND ALSO AT NO.1620A, 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR, CHENNAI-600040 …PETITIONER (BY SRI SURESH S LOKRE, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. MAHADEVASETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S HMT LTD, PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY, REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 2013, REP.BY ITS REPRESENTATIVE/ AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.59, BELLARY ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 032 Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18462 WP No. 11555 of 2025 2. THE MANAGER INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK ARUMBAKKAM BRANCH CHENNAI - 600 106 3. M/S. ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LIMITED, (ARCIL) PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY, REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 2013, REP. BY ITS OFFICER/GPA HOLDER SRI. PARESH MEHATANI NO.29, THE RUBY, 10TH FLOOR, SENAPATHI BAPAT MARG DADAR WEST, MUMBAI-400 028 4. THE FOREST DEPARTMENT GOVT OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS ARANYA BHAVAN, 18TH CROSS, KODANDARAMPURA, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003. 5. DR. KARTHICK SADASIVAM PRACTICING DOCTOR, GENESIS HOSPITAL NO.1076, 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR METTUPALYAM ROAD NEAR VADA KOVAI, R.S.PURAM COIMBATORE - 641 002. 6. DR. NIRMALA SADASIVAM PRACTICING DOCTOR GENESIS HOSPITAL NO.1076, 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18462 WP No. 11555 of 2025 METTUPALYAM ROAD NEAR VADA KOVAI, R.S.PURAM COIMBATORE - 641 002. 7. KRAFTALPHA PROPERTIES LLP LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REGISTERD UNDER LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT, REP. BY ITS PARTNERS 1)SRI. RAMACHANDRA DINESH 2)SMT. KIRTHANA DINESH NO.13, 1ST FLOOR, GREEN LEAF EXTENSION 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE -560034. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPLICATIONS IA.NO.02/2025 AND IA.NO.03/2025 DATED 22/02/2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OS.NO.2178/2025 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT BANGALORE CCH-2, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE C AND D IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND OTHERS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18462 WP No. 11555 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER Heard Sri. Suresh S. Lokre, learned Senior counsel for Sri. Mahadevasetty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and have perused the material on record. 2. The petitioner-plaintiff is before this Court calling in question an order dated 24.03.2025, by which, the claim of the petitioner for grant of a temporary injunction is not considered, but it is kept open. 3. The learned Senior counsel takes this Court through the order that is impugned in the subject petition to contend that the Court ought to have granted a temporary injunction to the petitioner against the defendants therein. The petitioner is said to be the owner of the property for having purchased it from the first respondent - M/s. HMT Limited in the year 2006. After the said purchase, has availed loan from Indian Overseas Bank and defaulted in payment. The Indian Overseas Bank taken steps to recover the amount by initiating proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. During the pendency of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18462 WP No. 11555 of 2025 proceedings, handed over the recovery to respondent No.3 - M/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, who have now taken over the process under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The property is said to have been sold by respondent No.3 - M/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited. 4. The learned Senior counsel would submit that the problem arose because of the sale by respondent No.1 - M/s. HMT Limited to the petitioner way back in the year 2006 and therefore, he has filed a suit for declaration and injunction and the nature of the property would be changed by respondent No.3 - M/s. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited, who have sold the property in favour of respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7. 5. The submission of the learned counsel does not merit any acceptance for grant of injunction, as the Court has only observed that the consideration of an application for grant of temporary injunction can be only after the Government Agencies are heard, as the contention of the petitioner is that - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18462 WP No. 11555 of 2025 respondent No.4 - the Forest Department, seeking to take over the property. 6. In that light, the defendants therein, the official respondents are required to be heard. 7. Learned Senior counsel submits that all the defendants are served. 8. In that light, I deem it appropriate to dispose the subject petition directing the concerned Court to dispose the application filed by the petitioner seeking temporary injunction, after hearing all the parties, in accordance with law, with an outer limit of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26