- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49332 WP No. 10162 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 10162 OF 2021 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI CHANDRASHEKARA S/O LATE UGRAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/AT SHENESHWARA TEMPLE ROAD NEAR AUTO STAND CIRCLE UPPARAHALLY, TUMAKURU - 572 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI SHASHIKALA BELGAM, ADV., FOR SMT. S.B. LAKSHMI, ADV.) AND: 1. SMT. ANITHA W/O KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. 2. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O LATE UGRAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/AT MAIN ROAD NEAR AUTO STAND CIRCLE UPPARAHALLY, TUMAKURU - 572 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M.B. CHANDRA CHOODA, ADV., FOR R-1 & R-2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO VIDE COURT ORDER DTD 31.03.2021 THIS MSA-118/19 IS CONVERTED IN WP 10162/2021.THIS W.P. IS FILED PRAYING TO -SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 31.10.2019 I.E., ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, TUMAKURU IN MA NO.21/2016 AND CONSEQUENTLY CONFIRM THE ORDER DTD 16.06.2016 PASSED BY Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49332 WP No. 10162 of 2021 THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, TUMAKURU IN O.S.NO.263/2015. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Plaintiff is before this Court in his writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 31.10.2019 passed in M.A.No.21of 2016 by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumkur vide Annexure-A. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Petitioner / plaintiff has filed O.S..No.263 of 2015 before the jurisdictional civil Court at Tumkur seeking the relief of declaration and consequential relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule properties. The contesting defendants have filed written statement and opposed the suit claim. I.A.No.1 was filed on behalf of the plaintiff in O.S.No.263 of 2015 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC praying to - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49332 WP No. 10162 of 2021 grant an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants or anybody claiming under them from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The said application was opposed by the contesting defendants by filing objections. The trial Court, vide order dated 16.06.2016 had allowed I.A.No.1 filed in O.S.No.263 of 2015. As against the said order, the defendants had filed M.A.No.21 of 2016 which was allowed on 31.10.2019 and being aggrieved by the said order, plaintiff is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the appellate Court was not justified in setting aside the well-reasoned and discretionary order passed by the trial Court. He submits that the plaintiff had made out the prima facie case before the trial Court and the appellate Court without appreciating the same has set aside the order passed on I.A.No.I by the trial Court. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that suit is at the stage of addressing final - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49332 WP No. 10162 of 2021 arguments and for the last 6 years there is no interim order in favour of the petitioner herein. The trial Court may be directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously and the same would serve the ends of the case. 6. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that, that the trial Court taking into consideration the documentary evidence made available by the plaintiff had granted order of temporary injunction by allowing I.A.No.I filed in O.S.No.263 of 2015. The said order has been set aside by the appellate Court in M.A.No.21 of 2016 vide impugned order dated 31.10.2019. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents for the last more than 6 years there is no interim order operating in the suit and it is not in dispute that the suit itself is at the stage of addressing final argument on merits of the case. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that at this juncture it is not necessary for this Court to consider this petition on merits and if the petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the suit itself on the merits within a time frame, the same would serve the ends of justice. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49332 WP No. 10162 of 2021 7. Accordingly, the following :- ORDER Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to dispose of O.S.No.263 of 2015 on its merits as early as possible, but not later than a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order without being influenced by any observations passed by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumkur in its order dated 31.10.2019 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal No.21 of 2016, which is impugned in this writ petition. Pending IAs' do not survive for consideration and accordingly the same are disposed of. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45