- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO. 16804 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MR. SREEJITH PURUSHOTHAMAN S/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN KANI SHREYAS AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS 2. MRS. RANJIBA PARAMMAL W/O SREEJITH PURUSHOTHAMAN AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS BOTH R/A NO. 14165, PRESTIGE TRANQUILITY, BUDIGERE ROAD, BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE, BENGALURU - 560 049. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. ABDUL RAZAAQ A, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.N.DAYALU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. B.L. KODANDA RAMAIAH S/O. SRI. B. C. LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. .SMT. KALAVATHI R W/O SRI. B. L. KODANDA RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 3. SRI. CHAITHANYA Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 S/O SRI. B. L. KODANDA RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R1 TO R3 RESIDING AT NO.14, SENA VIHAR, KAMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 043. 4. SRI. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @B.L. ANAND KUMAR. S/O. SRI. B. C. LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. 5. SMT. SUJATHA G W/O SRI. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @ B.L. ANAND KUMAR. AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. 6. MASTER ADITHYA NANDAN S/O. SRI. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @ B.L. ANAND KUMAR AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS. (SINCE DEFENDANT NO. 6 IS MINOR, HE IS DULY REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL AND NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER MR. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @ BL ANAND KUMAR) R4 TO R6 RESIDING AT NO.831, 2ND FLOOR, 26TH MAIN, 10TH CROSS, HSR LAYOUT, I SECTOR, BENGALURU - 560 102. 7. SRI. B.L. GIRISH KUMAR S/O. SRI. B. C. LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 8. SMT. KOMALAKSHI B.N. W/O SRI. B.L. GIRISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 9. MASTER B.G. TEJAS S/O. SRI. B. L. GIRISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, 10. MASTER B.G. MOHITH S/O. SRI. B. L. GIRISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS (SINCE DEFEDANTS NO.9 AND 10 ARE MINOR THEY ARE DULY REPRESENTED BY THEIR LEGAL AND NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER SRI. B. L. GIRISH KUMAR) R7 TO R10 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 008, SHANTI 3, SAI GARDENS, SEEGEHALLI BENGALURU - 560 067. 11. KEYA HOMES PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI DINESH KEJRIWAL NO. 17. REGENT COURT, GROUND FLOOR. 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA 4TH BLOCK BENGALURU - 560 034 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R11) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 28.05.2025 ISSUING EMERGENT NOTICE IN O.S. NO.155/2025 IA NO.2 ON THE FILE OF THE VACATION JUDGE, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE AT ANNEXURE-Y AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs: "a. Issue a writ or writs in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the order dated 28.05.2025 issuing emergent notice in O.S. No.155/2025 on I.A.No.2 on the file of the Vacation judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore at Annexure-Y. b. Issue a writ or writs in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents/Defendants in O.S. No. 155/2025 on the file of the Vacation judge. Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, not to alienate, encumber, or create any third-party interest in respect of the suit schedule property, pending disposal of I.A. No.2 filed for grant of temporary injunction in the said suit; c. In the alternative, direct the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit schedule property, pending consideration and final disposal of I.A. No.2; d. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity." - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed a suit for specific performance and along with the suit, he has filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') for interim relief, which has not been considered by the trial Court, which compelled the petitioners to knock the doors of this Court and this Court granted an ex parte interim order. 3. It is submitted that the petitioners have a good case on merits and if the interim order is not granted during the pendency of the suit, the respondent-builder is likely to alienate the suit schedule property in favour of third parties which would lead to multiplicity of the proceedings. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. 4. Per contra, Sri.B.Vachan, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.11 submits that the application filed by the petitioners for temporary injunction is still pending and the trial Court has issued notice to the defendants. It is submitted that the petitioners have rushed to this Court and the present petition is premature as the trial Court is required to consider the rival submissions on their merits and is required to dispose - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 of the application filed by the petitioners. It is further submitted that the respondents have not filed their objections to the application and a written statement, as no suit summons was served on the date of granting of the interim order by this Court. He seeks to dismiss the petition by directing the trial Court to consider the pending application on its merits. 5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents meticulously perused the material available on record. 6. The petitioner has filed O.S.No.155/2025 for relief of specific performance of the agreement dated 14.10.2023 against the respondents. Along with the said suit/plaint, the petitioners have filed an application in I.A.No.2 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, seeking prayer to grant ex parte interim injunction against the respondents. The trial Court under the impugned order issued emergent notice on the said application. In the meanwhile, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking relief of injunction. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 7. It is noticed that this Court vide order dated 18.06.2025 has granted ex parte interim order directing the respondents not to alienate the suit schedule property or create any third party rights during the pendency of this petition. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents is right in submitting that the trial Court is required to consider the pending application on its merits after providing sufficient opportunity to the respondent to file objections to oppose the application. 9. Taking note of the rival submissions and nature of the dispute, I am of the considered view that the interest of justice would be met, if the interim order granted by this Court dated 18.06.2025 is continued till the trial Court disposes of I.A.No.2 filed by the petitioners under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed in part. ii. The interim order granted by this Court on 18.06.2025 is continued till the trial court - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:52824 WP No. 16804 of 2025 disposes of I.A.No.2 filed by the petitioners under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC. iii. The respondents are permitted to file objections to I.A.No.2 as well as a written statement. iv. The trial Court shall consider the aforesaid application on its merits after providing sufficient opportunity to the parties to the proceeding and dispose of the same. v. All the contentions urged by the parties are kept open. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4