- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9446 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 9342 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) IN WP No.9446/2026: BETWEEN: 1. SRI. KALASWAMY, S/O KALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. 2. SRI. DESHENDRA, S/O LATE K.P. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. 3. SRI. ANDANAPPA, S/O LATE R. RAMU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. 4. SRI. ERAIAH, S/O LATE ERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS. 5. SMT. HOOVAMMA, W/O MARISWAMYNAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 5 ARE ALL RESIDING AT THERANIMUNTI VILLAGE, KANDALIKE HOBLI, SARAGUR TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571121. Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 SRI. KARIMALLAIAH DIED ON 05.05.2025 HENCE NOT MADE AS A PARTY …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. P. MAHESHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. H.R. RAVICHANDRA S/O LATE. R RAJASHEKARA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT H. NO.748, 18TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560034. 2. SRI. ANIL K. IRANI, S/ O K G IRANI, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/ AT H.NO.238, 4TH CROSS, 4TH MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560034. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAJADITHYA SADASHIVAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI T CHANDRA NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 AND R2 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF TEMPORARY JUNCTION GRANTED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, HEGGADA DEVANA KOTE, IN O.S.NO.371/2023 DATED 05-07-2024 VIDE ANNEXURE D, AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC H.D KOTE IN MA NO.6/24 DTD 24.02.26 VIDE ANNX-F. IN WP NO.9342/2026: BETWEEN: 1. SRI. ANANDAPPA, S/O LATE R RAMU, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS. 2. SRI. ERAIAH, S/O LATE ERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEAR. 3. SRI. DESHENDRA, S/O LATE K.P SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. 4. SMT. HOOVAMMA, W/O MARISWAMYNAYAKA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS 5. SRI. KALASWAMY, S/O KALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 5 ARE ALL RESIDING AT THERANIMUNTI VILLAGE KANDALIKE HOBLI, SARAGUR TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT - 571121. SRI KARIMALLAIAH DIED ON 05.05.2025 HENCE NOT MADE AS A PARTY ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. P. MAHESHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. Y.R. RAJESH KUMAR S/O LATE Y. CHAKRAPANI, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/AT H.NO.35, 'RANGA NIVASA' 9TH CROSS, 2ND STAGE, BRUNDAVANA BADAVANE, MYSURU CITY-570020. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJADITHYA SADASHIVAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T. CHANDRA NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 ) - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF TEMPORARY INJUNCTION GRANTED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC, HEGGADA DEVANA KOTE, IN O.S. NO.367/2023 DATED 05.07.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-D, AND CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC H.D. KOTE, IN M.A. NO.7/2024 DATED 24.02.2026 VIDE ANNEXURE-F. THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD ORAL ORDER 1. In W.P.No.9446/2026, the petitioners-defendant Nos.2 to 6 have called in question the order dated 24.02.2026 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, H.D.Kote (for short ‘First Appellate Court) in M.A.No.6/2024, whereby the First Appellate Court has confirmed the order dated 05.07.2024 passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, H.D.Kote, (for short ‘Trial Court’) on I.A.No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, in O.S.No.371/2023 granting an order of temporary injunction. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 2. In W.P.No.9342/2026, the petitioners-defendant Nos.1 to 5 have called in question the order dated 24.02.2026 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, H.D.Kote (for short ‘First Appellate Court) in M.A.No.7/2024, whereby the First Appellate Court has confirmed the order dated 05.07.2024 passed by the Civil Judge and JMFC, H.D.Kote (for short ‘Trial Court’) on I.A.No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, in O.S.No.367/2023, granting an order of temporary injunction. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Trial Court in Original Suits. 4. The plaintiffs filed the said suits before the Trial Court seeking for relief of permanent injunction. Along with the suits, plaintiffs filed I.A.No.1 under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC in respective suits seeking for an - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 order of temporary injunction. After hearing the parties, the Trial Court by orders dated 05.07.2024 allowed the applications restraining the defendants their agents, servants and anybody acting through them from interfering into the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment over the suit schedule properties, till the disposal of the suit. Aggrieved by the orders passed by the Trial Court, the defendants filed respective appeals in M.A.No.6/2024 and M.A.No.7/2024 before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Court, by impugned order dated 24.02.2026 has dismissed the appeals by confirming the orders passed by the Trial Court. Aggrieved by the order dated 24.02.2026 passed by the First Appellate Court in M.A.No.6/2024 and M.A.No.7/2024, the present writ petitions are filed by the defendants respectively. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ papers. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 6. The case of the plaintiffs is that they have purchased the properties from one Sri.S.A.Vasantharajaiah through a registered sale deed dated 20.01.2002. The said Vasantharajaiah had inturn purchased the property from the legal heirs/children of one Smt.Rukminiyamma in the year 1992. The plaintiffs have produced the RTC extracts for the year 1983-1984, which shows that the property stands in the name of plaintiffs, his vendors and predecessors in title. A presumption under Section 133 of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act arises in favour of the plaintiffs based on the revenue entries. The defendants have not produced any cogent material to rebut the said presumption. The only documents produced by the defendants are photographs to show the presence of their ancestors tombs and revenue mahazar. But the revenue records stand in the name of plaintiffs, their vendors and predecessors in title. The Trial Court has considered these aspects in paragraphs 21 and 22 of its order dated 05.07.2024 and has rightly concluded that the plaintiffs - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:19910 WP No. 9446 of 2026 C/W WP No. 9342 of 2026 have established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience lies in their favour. Accordingly the Trial Court has rightly allowed the applications and the orders of the Trial Court have been rightly confirmed by the First Appellate Court. 7. Viewed from any angle, there is no error or illegality in the orders passed by both the Courts below warranting any interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 8. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed. Sd/- (H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 57