- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1196 WP No. 100395 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO.100395 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT. B. SHARADA W/O. LATE B. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 33(6), WARD NO.16, RADHIKA THEATRE ROAD, TQ AND DIST. BALLARI-583101. REP. BY HER GPA NAMELY DR. DHANANJAYA S/O LATE B. KRISHNA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O NEAR RADHIKA THEATRE ROAD, VADDRABANDA STREET, TQ AND DIST. BALLARI-583101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VADIRAJA PADAKANDLA, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI KATUGARA GANGADHARA S/O K. KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O WARD NO.4, KOLI BAZAR, KUDITHINI VILLAGE, BALLARI DISTRICT 583101. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS DISPENSED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF NOT GRANTING THE AD-INTERIM INJUNCTION DATED. 20/12/2024 PASSED BY LEARNED 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BALLARI ON I.S. II IN R.A. NO. 67/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A BYAHATTI Date: 2025.01.24 16:37:00 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1196 WP No. 100395 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) 1. Notice to respondent is dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed. 2. The petitioner is before this court seeking for the following relief: “Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order of not granting the ad-interim injunction dated 20/12/2024 passed by learned 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ballari on I.A.II in R.A.No. 67/2024 vide Annexure-D, in the interest of justice and equity.” 3. The petitioner had filed a suit in O.S.No.375/2020, seeking for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with her possession as also for mandatory injunction. The said suit came to be partly decreed vide judgment and decree dated 25.10.2024, granting the permanent injunction restraining defendant from interfering with her possession. But however, the mandatory injunction - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1196 WP No. 100395 of 2025 was refused. Challenging the said refusal, the petitioner had filed R.A.No.67/2024, wherein the petitioner once again made an application in I.A.No.2 seeking for injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the possession of the petitioner. An ad-interim prayer sought for being rejected, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. The submission of Sri Vadiraja Padakandla, learned counsel for the petitioner is that there is a threat of dispossession and as such, said application had been filed. A judgement and Decree of permanent injunction having already been passed, the question of further granting ad-interim injunction being sought for in an appeal filed by the petitioner, would not arise since the challenge is only as regards the non-grant of the mandatory injunction and allowing of the counterclaim by the defendants. If at all, there is any interference with the possession of the petitioner thereby violating the injunction granted in O.S.No.375/2020, the petitioner could always file necessary applications for contempt/execution or the like. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1196 WP No. 100395 of 2025 5. Another application for injunction and that too an ad- interim injunction not being maintainable, no grounds being made out, the petition stands dismissed reserving the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49