- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010477422026 NC: 2026:KHC:37321 WP No. 21678 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 21678 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. KRISHNAPPA, S/O SRI. SIDDEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1383, 18TH MAIN, D GROUP LAYOUT, SRIGANDADA KAVALU, BENGALURU - 560 091. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIDHI S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA, D/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH @ IYANNA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. 2. SMT. JAYAMMA, D/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH @ IYANNA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010477422026 NC: 2026:KHC:37321 WP No. 21678 of 2026 3. SMT. YASHODAMMA, D/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH @ IYANNA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. 4. SMT. GANGAMMA, D/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH @ IYANNA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. 5. SMT. RATHNAMMA, D/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH @ IYANNA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. 6. SMT. NARASAMMA, D/O LATE SRI. NARASIMHAIAH @ IYANNA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. 7. SMT. KOMALA, D/O LATE SMT.KRISHNAMMA, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, R/AT ADAKAMARANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI - 562 123. …RESPONDENTS - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010477422026 NC: 2026:KHC:37321 WP No. 21678 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE LEARNED II ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MAGADI, TO FORTHWITH CONSIDER AND DISPOSE OF I.A. NO.1 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULES 1 AND 2 CPC IN OS NO.526/2025, SEEKING TEMPORARY INJUNCTION RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENTS, THEIR AGENTS, SERVANTS, HENCHMAN, GPA HOLDER, SUPPORTERS, FAMILY MEMBERS OR ANYBODY CLAIMING ANY RIGHT UNDER THEM FROM INTERFERING WITH THE PLAINTIFF/S PEACEFUL, LAWFUL, PHYSICAL POSSESSION AND ENJOYMENT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY, WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THIS HONBLE COURT AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 06.01.2026 in OS.No.526/2025 on the file of the II Addl.Civil Judge and JMFC., Magadi, whereby the Court, without considering the application filed for an ad-interim ex-parte temporary injunction against the defendants, issued suit summons to them. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010477422026 NC: 2026:KHC:37321 WP No. 21678 of 2026 2. It is submitted that defendant No.1 is served and remained ex-parte, defendant Nos.2, 4 to 7 are not served and defendant No.3 is served and right from February,2026 continuously, the unserved defendants are avoiding the notice and at the same time, they are continuing with the encroachment. 3. It is submitted that when an application is filed seeking ad interim injunction, the Court ought to have passed an order on the merits of the matter instead of issuing suit summons and right from February,2026 this is continuing. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner is left with no other remedy but to approach this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. He relied upon the judgment of co- ordinate bench of this Court in Dhalitha Vividha GramodyogaKaigarikaSahakara Sanga Niyamitha (R) Vs Samatha Sainika Dal SSD, arising out of W.P.No.35488/2025(GM-CPC)dated 09.12.2025, whereby Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has observed as follows: "6. This Court does not find any need or necessity to issue notice to the respondent- defendant for the reason that the petitioner is questioning the non-passing of the order - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010477422026 NC: 2026:KHC:37321 WP No. 21678 of 2026 on the application in IA.No.1, wherein the trial Court has neither passed any order for grant of an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction or for rejection of the same. 7. When an application is filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC by the plaintiff along with the plaint seeking an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction, it becomes the duty and obligation of the trial Court to consider the same and pass suitable orders either granting or rejecting the ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction. This Court in the case of Karnataka State Cricket Association vs. Mr.Shashidhara A.V. in WP.No.33725/2025 [Decided on 17.11.2025] has made certain observations and guidelines as to how the trial Court has to deal with an application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. It is not optional for the trial Court to merely issue notice to the defendant before passing an interim order of temporary injunction against the defendant. 8. The trial Court will also have to consider judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Shiv Kumar Chadha vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and others reported in (1993)3 SCC 161, Time City Infrastructure and Housing Limited Lucknow vs. State of U.P. and Others reported in 2025 SCC Online SC 1674 and the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vedant Fashions Pvt. Ltd., vs. Smt.Rajul Devi reported in 2014 SCC OnLine Kar 7191 while deciding the application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC. 9. It is brought to the notice of this Court that notice is yet to be served on the defendant. Therefore, it would be appropriate for this Court to direct the trial Court to decide the application either granting or rejecting an ad interim ex parte order of - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010477422026 NC: 2026:KHC:37321 WP No. 21678 of 2026 temporary injunction by providing proper reasons." 5. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is passing the following order. ORDER (i) Writ petition is disposed of. (ii) The Trial Court shall consider IA No. 1/2025 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, notwithstanding the fact that the notices are not served on the defendants. (iii) All pending I.As., in the writ petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26