- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26948 W.P. No.14623/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT PETITION NO.14623/2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: NAGARAJ B.K. S/O KRISHNASHETTY AGED 56 YEARS LAKSHMIPURA LAYOUT BELUR TOWN, BELUR HASSAN DISTRICT 573115. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K. MANJUNATHA RAO BHONSLE, ADV.,) AND: 1. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER HASSAN ZILLA PANCHAYAT HASSAN 573201. 2. EXECUTIVE OFFICER BELUR TALUK PANCHAYAT BELUR 573115 HASSAN DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANOJ M. NAIK, ADV., FOR SRI. A. NAGARAJAPPA, ADV., FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH/SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 23.09.2021 PASSED ON I.A.NO.III IN OS.NO.318/2020 VIDE ANNEXURE-E ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE SR. CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC COURT, BELUR AND THE ORDER DTD 22.02.2022 PASSED IN M.A.NO.14 OF 2021 VIDE Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26948 W.P. No.14623/2022 ANNEXURE-G ON THE FILE OF THE HON’BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE COURT, BELUR AND FURTHER PLEASED TO ALLOW THE IA NO.III FILED UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 & ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER This writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 23.09.2021 passed on I.A.No.III filed in O.S.No.318/2020 pending on the file of the Civil Judge and JMFC, Belur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Trial Court’) and the order dated 22.02.2022 passed in MA.No.14/2021 by the Senior Civil Judge, Belur (for short ‘the Appellate Court’). 2. Heard Sri.K.Manjunatha Rao Bhonsle, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Manoj.M.Naik, learned counsel for Sri. A.Nagarajappa, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and perused the material on record. 3. The petitioner herein is the tenant in the suit schedule premises i.e. Shop Premises No.3 & 4, Taluk Panchayat, Belur owned by the respondents as per the lease - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26948 W.P. No.14623/2022 agreement dated 18.05.2015 on a monthly rent of Rs.2,860/-. The petitioner is carrying out the business of a grocery shop in the suit schedule premises and period of lease came to an end on 19.11.2019. Subsequently, respondent No.2 issued a Notice on 02.09.2020 and 09.10.2020 to vacate the suit premises on the ground that the lease period had been completed. The petitioner herein urged the respondents to renew the lease agreement, however, the same was not replied to. Thereafter, the petitioner herein filed a suit in O.S.No.318/2020 seeking the relief of permanent injunction against the respondents restraining them from evicting the petitioner from the suit schedule premises. In the said suit, the petitioner filed I.A.No.III under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘CPC’) seeking interim injunction against the respondent No.2 from dispossessing the petitioner from the suit schedule premises. 4. The Trial Court considered the said application and rejected the same on the ground that the suit was not maintainable in view of the express bar of jurisdiction as per Section 16 of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26948 W.P. No.14623/2022 Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), therefore, in view of the main suit being barred, the question of granting interim relief would not arise. It was also held that no prima facie case was made out by the petitioner, the balance of convenience did not lie in favour of the petitioner and also that no irreparable damage would be caused to the petitioner and proceeded to dismiss the application. The petitioner filed an appeal on the aforesaid order of the Trial Court in M.A.No.14/2021, wherein the Appellate Court passed the order dated 22.02.2022 affirming the order passed by Trial Court. The petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders has filed this petition. 5. It is to be noticed that this Court vide order dated 25.07.2022 has passed an interim order directing that ‘Until the next date of hearing, the possession of the petitioner in the shops in question shall not be disturbed’ but also gave the respondents the liberty to proceed with the proceedings under the provisions of the Act. Hence, I am of the considered view that in view of the pendency of the suit in O.S.No.318/2020, the interest of justice would be met if the earlier order dated - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26948 W.P. No.14623/2022 25.07.2022 passed by this Court is continued till the disposal of the suit. The observation of the Trial Court that the suit is not maintainable is required to be considered by it at an appropriate stage. If the respondents are allowed to vacate the petitioner, without due process of law, it would cause great injustice, to the petitioner/plaintiff. Considering the rival contentions and taking note of the fact that the suit of the plaintiff is pending, it would be appropriate to continue the interim order granted by this Court till disposal of the suit, by reserving the liberty to the respondents by initiating the appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. For the aforementioned reasons, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of. ii. The parties shall maintain status quo till the disposal of the suit. iii. The Trial Court shall dispose of O.S.No.380/2020 as expeditiously as possible, taking note of the pendency of cases before it. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26948 W.P. No.14623/2022 iv. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. No order as to costs. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37