- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 33447 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI BHARATH JAGANATHAN S/O JAGANATHAN AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.108 WARD NO.184 THURUHALLI VILLAGE UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU 560061 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. NARAYANA SWAMY.G.,ADVOCATE) AND: SENTHIL MAJOR R/AT NO.107 WARD NO. 184 THURAHALLI VILLAGE UTTARAHALLI HOBLI BENGALURU -560 061 …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO GRANT AD-INTERIM ORDER OF EXPARTE TEMPORARY INJUNCTION RESTRAINING THE DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT FROM INTERFERING WITH PLAINTIFFS PEACEFUL POSSESSION OVER THE SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY PENDING DISPOSAL OF THE IA NO.1 IN O.S NO.1138/2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-A BEFORE THE II ADDI CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, (JR DN) BENGALURU RURAL. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff being aggrieved by non-passing of the orders by the trial Court on I.A. No.1 filed by him under Order - XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure in O.S. No.1138/2025. 2. This Court does not find any need to issue notice to the respondent as he has not appeared before the trial Court and no notice is served to him. 3. Parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court. 4. The plaintiff filed the suit against the defendant for the relief of Permanent Injunction and other consequential reliefs. Alongwith the plaint, the plaintiff filed I.A. No.1 under Order - XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure for an ad interim order of Temporary Injunction restraining the defendant, his agents or servants or henchmen from interfering with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property, till disposal of the suit. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 5. In the affidavit accompanying the application, the plaintiff stated that he is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property measuring 9528.75 square feet, having acquired the same by virtue of the registered sale deed dated 10.12.2021. The khatha of the property stands in the name of the plaintiff and he is paying property tax to the BBMP. It is also stated that he has constructed a house in the suit schedule property in the year 2024 and now making some renovations within the house constructed in the suit schedule property. This being the state of affairs, the defendant who is residing in the adjacent property of the plaintiff claiming to be the Manager of Mr. Dayananda Kamath and Archana Kamath, who are owners of the adjacent property bearing No.107, Ward No.184, Thurahalli village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru, acting on their behalf alongwith other henchmen have been willfully and unlawfully causing obstruction and disturbance to the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff. 6. In the affidavit accompanying the application, the plaintiff further stated that the defendant alongwith his - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 henchmen have been putting stones on the road in front of his house with an intention to restrict free movement of his vehicles and this unlawful obstruction amounts to an unauthorized and illegal act, depriving him of ingress and egress to his property. It is further stated that the defendant alongwith his henchmen have been intentionally dumping debris, construction waste and agricultural waste in front of residence of the plaintiff causing serious health hazards to the plaintiff and his family members and general public. It is also pleaded that the defendant and his agents have trespassed into the suit schedule property and threatened plaintiff's lawful use and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Being aggrieved, the plaintiff approached the jurisdictional Police and the Police have refused to register a complaint and hence, he submitted a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bengaluru South. It is also pleaded that the actions of the defendant are deliberate and he is acting in a hostile, provocative and unlawful manner causing inconvenience with an intention to knock off the property. On these grounds, the plaintiff sought an ad interim order of Temporary Injunction restraining the defendant, his agents or servants or henchmen from interfering - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property, till disposal of the suit. 7. Learned counsel for petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the petition and the averments made in the affidavit accompanying the application contended that the trial Court erred in not granting an exparte order of ad-interim order of Temporary Injunction when there is a prima facie case and balance of convenience lies in favour of the plaintiff. Therefore, learned counsel seeks to allow the petition. 8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for petitioner and perused the pleadings and grounds urged in the memorandum of petition. 9. The three ingredients to be seen by the Court while considering the application for Temporary Injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of CPC are prima facie case; balance of convenience; and hardship that would be caused to the aggrieved party. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 10. The trial Court without considering the sale deed, the khatha issued by the BBMP, tax paid receipts, the building licence, electricity bill, sanctioned plan, police complaint and other materials placed before the Court, merely issued emergent notice to the defendant on I.A. No.1 and not granted the exparte order of Temporary Injunction. Aggrieved by which, the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court in the present petition. 11. The plaintiff has made out a prima facie case by production of documents stated hereinabove to show that he is the absolute owner in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The materials on record prima facie reveal that the plaintiff is in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property as lawful owner of the suit schedule property. The trial Court ought to have taken all these documents into consideration and granted an exparte ad-interim order of Temporary Injunction in order to protect the rights of the plaintiff. When there is a threat of dispossession, it - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 becomes duty and obligation on the part of the trial Court to consider and pass orders expeditiously on the application for Temporary Injunction. The material on record is prima facie sufficient for the trial court to grant the exparte order of Temporary Injunction. In the present case, no such endeavour is made except issuance of the notice. 12. Under the circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: O R D E R i) The Petition is allowed. ii) There shall be an exparte ad-interim order of Temporary Injunction restraining the respondents/defendant from interfering with petitioner/plaintiff's peaceful possession over the suit schedule property, till disposal of I.A. No.1 filed under Order-XXXIX Rules - 1 & 2 of CPC in O.S. No.1138/2025, on merits. iii) The Petitioner shall comply the provisions of Order-XXXIX Rule-3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45406 WP No. 33447 of 2025 iv) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter. v) Order passed herein is solely for the purpose of grant of an ad-interim exparte order of Temporary Injunction. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28