- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43820 WP No. 11987 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 11987 OF 2024 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. S.M. SRIDHARA S/O LATE MADAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS. 2. MALLIGAMMA W/O S.M. SRIDHARA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS. 3. MANGALAMMA D/O S.M. SRIDHARA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS. 4. SHOBHA D/O MANGALAMMA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. 5. NAGAMMA D/O MANGALAMMA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE R/AT WEST OF VIDHYANAGARA DEVEERAMMANAHALLI BADAVANE (DEVEERAMMANAHALLI GATE) BENGALURU NILIGERE ROAD NANJANGUD - 571 118. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI MAHESHCHANDRA B.N, ADV.) AND: J.P. MAHADEV S/O LATE SHIVANNA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS NO2256 VIDHYANAGAR Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43820 WP No. 11987 of 2024 NEAR RANI FARM NANJANGUD TOWN - 571 118. …RESPONDENT THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD. 24.05.2023 PASSED BY I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, NANJANGUD ON IA NO.1 IN OS 181/2022 PRODUCED AT ANNX-E, E-1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY ORAL ORDER 1. Defendants are 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 24.05.2023 passed on IA No.1 in OS No.181/2022 by the Court of I Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Nanjanagudu and the order dated 05.03.2024 passed in MA No.13/2023 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Nanjangudu. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. Respondent herein has filed OS No.181/2022 before the jurisdictional Civil Court at Nanjanagudu seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants or anybody claiming under them from interfering with the peaceful - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43820 WP No. 11987 of 2024 possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties in any manner except under due process of law. It is the case of the plaintiff that suit schedule property was leased in his favour by the defendants and in the said premises, he is running a tea shop for which he also has got a Trade License issued by the local body. He has alleged that defendants were trying to forcibly dispossess him from the suit schedule property and accordingly, had approached the jurisdictional Civil Court in OS No.181/2022. In the said suit, defendants have filed a written statement opposing the suit claim. IA No.1 was filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking an order of temporary injunction during the pendency of the suit. The said application was opposed by the defendants, who had requested the Trial Court to consider their written statement as objections to IA No.1. The Trial Court vide the order dated 24.05.2023 has allowed IA No.1 filed in OS No.181/2022 and the said order has been confirmed by the Appellate Court in MA No.13/2023, which was rejected on 05.03.2024. It is under these circumstances, the defendants are before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43820 WP No. 11987 of 2024 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that the plaintiff had failed to produce necessary documents before the Court to show that he was in actual possession of the suit schedule property. He submits that plaintiff had surrendered the suit schedule property to the defendants much prior to he instituting the suit and for extraneous reasons, the suit is filed. 5. Perusal of the material on record would go to show that undisputedly the defendants are the owners of the suit schedule property and the said property was leased to the plaintiff under two separate lease deeds dated 17.09.2003 and 10.12.2003 respectively. According to the plaintiff, he is running a tea stall in the suit schedule property and in support of his contention, he has produced the Trade Licence issued in his favour by the local body for running the tea shop. The said Trade Licence is of the year 2017. The same would prima facie show that the plaintiff, who was put in possession of the suit schedule property under the aforesaid Deeds dated 17.09.2003 and 10.12.2003 had continued his possession of the property even after expiry of the period of lease and was carrying on the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43820 WP No. 11987 of 2024 business of tea stall in the suit schedule property. In addition to the aforesaid document, plaintiff has also produced certain photographs to show that he is running a tea shop in the suit schedule property. On the other hand, defendants had not produced any material before the Court to show that plaintiff had voluntarily surrendered the suit schedule property or that they had taken any action in accordance with law to evict him from the suit schedule property. 6. In the written statement which is filed by the defendants, they have not taken up any such contention that the plaintiff has surrendered the suit schedule property after expiry of the lease period at any other point of time nor they have raised a contention that possession of the suit schedule property was taken over by the defendants in accordance with law. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Trial Court was fully justified in allowing IA No.1 filed in OS No.181/2022 by the plaintiff. The Appellate Court having appreciated all these aspects of the matter has rightly rejected MA No.13/2023. Petitioner is before this Court as against the concurrent findings recorded against him. The order of temporary injunction is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43820 WP No. 11987 of 2024 operating in favour of plaintiff for the last about two and a half years. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the orders impugned does not call for interference at the hands of this Court. Considering the relief sought for in the suit as well as the year in which the suit is filed, if the trial Court is directed to expedite trial and dispose off the suit on its merits expeditiously, the same would serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the following order:- 7. The writ petition is dismissed. The Trial Court is requested to expedite the trial in OS No.181/2022 and dispose off the suit on its merits as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE DN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26