- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3172 OF 2025 (CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI H P VEERENDRA S/O H. PRANESH RAO AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.5/1, 7TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560003 2. SRI M. BALAPRASADA REDDY S/O RAGHUNANDANA REDDY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.92, SRI SAI NILAYA, 5TH MAIN, AGS LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560061 3. SMT. M. JAYASRI W/O SRI M. BALA PRASADA REDDY AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.92, SRI SAI NILAYA, 5TH MAIN, AGS LAYOUT, BANGALORE-560061 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHYAMA PRASADA K.V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI K P CHAMPAKADHAMASWAMY S/O LATE K.S.PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING OF NO.291, Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 1ST MAIN ROAD, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, BANGALORE-560086 2. SMT. RANI KUMARI W/O SRI K.P. CHAMPAKADHAMASWAMY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS RESIDING OF NO. 291, 1ST MAIN ROAD, WEST OF CHORD ROAD, BANGALORE-560086. 3. SRI VENKATAPPA S/O LATE MUNIHANUMAIAH AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS 4. SMT. BYRAMMA W/O LATE GANESH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS 5. SRI KUMAR S/O LATE GANESH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS 6. SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 7. SRI KOUSHIK S/O LATE RANGASWAMY AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS SL. NO.3 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT GIDADAKONENAHALLI VILLAGE AND MUDDINAPALYA DHAKALE, VISHWANEEDAM POST, YESHWANTAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK-560091. 8. SRI THIMMAHANUMAIAH S/O LATE MUDALAPPA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS RESIDING AT GIDADAKONENAHALLI, MUDDINAPALYA DAKALE, VISHWANEEDAM POST, YESHWANTAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK-560091. 9. SRI KRISHNA S/O LATE MUDLAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT GIDADAKONENAHALLI, MUDDINAPALYA DAKALE, VISHWANEEDAM POST, YESHWANTAPURA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK-560091. 10. SRI A.S. JAYARAMU S/O M. SIDDANNA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO.2036, 1ST MAIN ROAD, RPC LAYOUT II STAGE, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560040 11. SRI H.S. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O H. SEETHARAM AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDENT OF NO. 9/1 KANAKAPURA ROAD BASAVANAGUDI BANGALORE -560004 12. SRI H. PRANESH RAO S/O H. VEERABHADRA UPADHYAYA AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 35/1, 7TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN ROAD MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE-560003 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 13. SRI H. RAGHAVENDRA RAO S/O H. VEERABHADRA UPADHYAYA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 10/7 2ND MAIN ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE-560 020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PARAMESHWAR N. HEGDE.,ADV. FOR R1 & R2.) THIS MFA IS FILED U/O.43 RULE 1(r) OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 06.03.2025 PASSED ON IA NO. 1/2024 IN O.S.NO.2966/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CCH-36. ALLOWING THE IA.NO.1 FILED U/O.39 RULE 1 AND 2 R/W SEC.151 OF CPC, 1908. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT Defendant Nos.12, 13 and 14 are before this Court questioning the order passed on IA No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, dated 06.03.2025 on the file of XXXV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, whereby an order of ex-parte temporary injunction is granted against the defendants restraining them from interfering with the peaceful possession - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 and enjoyment of 'B' schedule property which is an easement of necessity. 2. The plaintiffs have filed suit OS No.2966/2024 seeking the relief of declaration that the suit schedule property is easement of necessity being the only approach road for the plaintiffs from the BDA main road to the suit schedule 'A' property. 3. The Trial Court after considering IA No.1 filed under XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, had allowed the said application and granted an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants to interfere with peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by plaintiffs which is an easement of necessity. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that plaintiffs have suppressed the facts before the Trial Court and obtained temporary injunction and has produced the order of conversion along with sketch. Further, it is submitted that in the sketch which is provided, it is found that there is another - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 road which is in existence for the plaintiffs to approach from the BDA main road to the suit schedule 'A' property and now, by virtue of filing this suit, they are trying to take over the suit schedule property. Admittedly, this order of conversion and the sketch appended to it are not produced before the Trial Court at the time of considering the application filed by the plaintiffs and as such, the Trial Court had no occasion to consider these documents. 5. On contrary, learned counsel for the respondents submits that now the matter is posted for 'further examination- in-chief of plaintiffs' and prayed that let there may be a direction to the Trial Court to dispose of the suit in a time bound manner which would meet the ends of principles of natural justice. 6. In view of the fact that the trial has begun and the matter is posted for further examination-in-chief of plaintiffs, in the considered opinion of this Court, a direction is issued to the Trial Court to dispose of the suit as expeditiously possible within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the parties on 19.09.2025 before the Trial Court. On that day, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33858 MFA No. 3172 of 2025 this case is coming up for further examination-in-chief of the plaintiffs. 7. With the above observation, the appeal is disposed of. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27