- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47671 WP No. 12895 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 12895 OF 2023 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI M. NARAYANAM @ BALESHA S/O MANCHAIAH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS RESIDING AT DASANADODDI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430. …PETITIONER (BY SRI NAVEEN J.N, ADV.) AND: SRI H.M. SHIVAMADHU S/O LATE MADEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS RESIDING AT HOSADODDI VILLAGE, DASANADODDI MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI LOKESHA D, ADV.) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTILCE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRINICPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT MALAVALLI ON IA NO.I IN OS NO. 465/2021 DTD 07.06.2022 MARKED AT ANNX -D TO THE WP. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47671 WP No. 12895 of 2023 ORAL ORDER 1. Defendant is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 07.06.2022 passed on I.A.No.I in OS No. 465 of 2021 by the Court of Prl. Civil Judge & JMFC, Malavalli and the order dated 14.11.2022 passed in M.A.No.7 of 2022 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Malavalli. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Respondent herein has filed O.S.No.465 of 2021 before the jurisdictional civil Court at Malavalli seeking the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. The petitioner herein, who is the sole defendant in the said suit has filed his written statement opposing the suit claim. The respondent herein had filed I.A.No.I under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 R/w Section 151 of CPC in OS No.465 of 2021 and the petitioner had filed objections to the same. Trial Court, vide the order dated 07.06.2022 has allowed I.ANo.I and the petitioner had unsuccessfully challenged the said order in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47671 WP No. 12895 of 2023 M.A.No. 7 of 2022, which was dismissed by the appellate Court by order dated 14.11.2022. Assailing the aforesaid two orders, petitioner / defendant is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that suit schedule property and the property of the petitioner in which he has constructed a house are totally different. Petitioner on the strength of the order of temporary injunction granted in the present suit is trying to interfere with the property of the defendant. He submits that this Court has granted an order of status quo which is in force for the last two years and the said order of status quo may be continued and the trial Court may be directed to dispose of the suit on merits expeditiously. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent / plaintiff has opposed the prayer made in the petition. He submits that I.A.No.1 of 2023 is filed by the petitioner to vacate the order of status quo passed by this Court on 26.06.2023. He submits that after this Court had passed an interim order directing the parties to maintain status quo, petitioner has tried to interfere with the possession and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47671 WP No. 12895 of 2023 enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the respondent and therefore respondent has not only filed a police complaint before the jurisdictional police but also has filed necessary application before the trial Court under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC. He submits that conduct of the petitioner does not entitle him for the equitable relief of continuing the interim order of status quo. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the petition. 6. Perusal of the material on the record would go to show that the suit schedule property bearing Survey No. 62/8A situated at Pandithanahalli Village, D.G Pura Hobli, Malavalli Taluk totally measures 10.08 guntas and in the written statement, the petitioner has stated that suit schedule property and the property of the petitioner are totally different. He has claimed right over the property bearing Survey No.62/8B measuring 0.05 guntas situated at Pandithanahalli Village, D.G Pura Hobli, Malavalli Taluk. 7. From the aforesaid it is apparent that the suit schedule property and the property on which the petitioner claims right and interest are totally different. The trial court as well as the appellate court having appreciated this aspect of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47671 WP No. 12895 of 2023 matter and also having appreciated that the petitioner has not produced any material to show that he has any interest, right or title in the suit schedule property have rightly granted an order of temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner. I do not find any illegality and irregularity in the concurrent findings recorded by the trial Court as well as the appellate court which is against the petitioner herein. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent has produced material before this Court which reflects that he has already initiated proceedings against the petitioner before the trial Court for having violated the order of temporary injunction by filing an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC. If the petitioner has a grievance against the respondent that he is interfering with his property on which he has claimed right in his written statement, it is for him to initiate appropriate proceedings before the proper forum to protect his property. Therefore, I do not find any good ground to entertain this petition. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:47671 WP No. 12895 of 2023 Since the petition itself is disposed of, IA No.1 of 2023 will not survive for consideration. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE NMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21