- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7477 WP No. 23318 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGAURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 23318 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SMT SAMPAMMA W/O LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT KAMMASANDRA VILLAGE ATTIBELE HOBLI,ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT- 562 106 …PETITIONER (BY SRI.SHARAN B TADAHAL, AND SRI. GOPI KRISHNA D., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SRI N KRISHNAPPA S/O LATE NALLAPPA @ CHIKKANALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS 2. SRI. GIRISH K S/O N KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS 3. SRI. JAYAVANTH G S/O GIRISH K AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS 4. SRI. NAGESH S/O N KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 5. SRI. RAJESH B K S/O N KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7477 WP No. 23318 of 2024 ALL ARE R/AT KRISHNAPPA BUILDING NEAR SRIRAMA TEMPLE BOMMASANDRA, ATTIBELE HOBLI ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S N ASHWATH NARAYANA., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR C., ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN O.S.NO.499/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT ANEKAL AND IN M.A.NO.10/2024 ON THE FILE OF II ADDL.SR.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT ANEKAL AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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 06.04.2024 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in M.A.No.10/2024, whereby, the order passed by the trial court in O.S.No.499/2023 dated 27.01.2024 has been confirmed. 2. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration declaring that the suit schedule ‘C’ and ‘E’ properties are the only - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7477 WP No. 23318 of 2024 access to reach ‘A’ schedule property of the plaintiff and also for a permanent injunction. Along with the plaint, plaintiff filed an IA under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. The trial court granted ex-parte temporary injunction order. After service of summons, the defendants appeared through a counsel and filed an application for vacating. After hearing the parties, the ex-parte temporary injunction order has been vacated and IA Nos.1 and 2 filed by the plaintiff have been dismissed on 27.01.2024. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner/plaintiff filed an appeal before the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Ankeal in M.A.No.10/2024. The I Appellate Court, by order dated 06.04.2024 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the trial court. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3. This Court, by order dated 25.09.2024 granted an interim order directing the respondents/defendants not to obstruct or close ‘C’ and ‘E’ suit schedule properties, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7477 WP No. 23318 of 2024 which provides access to ‘A’ schedule property, till the next date of hearing. 4. Sri S.N.Ashwathanarayana, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents/defendants has contended that there is no existing road which the plaintiff was using. The suit schedule properties are the absolute properties of the defendants and they are in possession of the property. Now, in the guise of the interim order passed by this Court, the plaintiff is trying to demolish the compound wall and change the nature of the land. 5. Be that as it may. Since the suit is at the stage of evidence, under the circumstances, the following order is passed: (i) The writ petition is disposed of. (ii) The trial court is directed to dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible, not later than six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7477 WP No. 23318 of 2024 (iii) Till then, the interim order granted by this Court shall continue. (iv) It is made clear that, in the guise of interim order, the plaintiff shall not alter the nature of the suit schedule property. (v) It is also made clear that the trial court, while disposing of the suit has to decide the same on merits, in accordance with law, independently, without being influenced by either the interim order passed by this Court or in the course of this order. (vi) Both the parties are directed to co-operate for expeditious disposal of the suit. (vii) In view of disposal of the main petition, all pending applications stand disposed of. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE CM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53