- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010479572026 NC: 2026:KHC:38783 WP No. 21733 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 21733 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: SRI. S RUDRAPPA S/O LATE R.SIDDA VEERAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.303A BAYANNA LAYOUT MIRZA ROAD, ANEKAL TOWN & TALUK BANGALORE- 562106 REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER SRI.DR UDAY KUMAR .R S/O S RUDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.303A BAYANNA LAYOUT, MIRZA ROAD ANEKAL TOWN & TALUK BANGALORE- 562106 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAVEEN S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. PUTTAMMA W/O LATE KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT GETRIGANABELE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE-562106. 2. SMT. LINGAMMA S/O LATE DODDA MADAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010479572026 NC: 2026:KHC:38783 WP No. 21733 of 2026 RESIDING AT GETRIGANABELE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE-562106. 3. SRI. PAPAAIAH AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS RESIDING AT GETRIGANABELE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE – 562106. 4. SRI. MUNIYALLAPPA S/O LATE CHIKKA SHOMBAIAH AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS RESIDING AT GETRIGANABELE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE – 562106. 5. SMT.ROOPAMMA W/O NAGARAJU MAJOR IN AGE RESIDING AT GETRIGANABELE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI,ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE-562106. 6. SRI.NAGARAJU MAJOR IN AGE RESIDING AT GETRIGANABELE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ANEKAL TALUK BANGALORE-562106. …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE SUITABLE WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE HON'BLE III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ANEKAL TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF NON- ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY INJUNCTION IN OS NO. 455/2026 DATED 04/07/2026 IN ANNEXURE- A AND ALLOW THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION U/O 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC IN ANNEXURE-H AND ETC. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010479572026 NC: 2026:KHC:38783 WP No. 21733 of 2026 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-plaintiff is before this Court aggrieved by the order dated 04.07.2026 passed by the III ACJ and JMFC, Anekal in O.S.No.455/2026, whereby the Trial Court has issued suit summons on I.A.No.1, which is filed seeking an ad-interim injunction. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when an application is filed seeking ad-interim injunction, the Trial Court has to pass an order on the merits of the case and cannot issue suit summons. He has relied upon the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court Dhalitha Vividha Gramodyoga Kaigarika Sahakara Sanga Niyamitha (R) Vs Samatha Sainika Dal SSD, arising out of W.P.No.35488/2025(GM-CPC) dated 09.12.2025, whereby the 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 on the application in IA.No.1, - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010479572026 NC: 2026:KHC:38783 WP No. 21733 of 2026 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 temporary injunction by providing proper reasons." s 3. Relying on this judgment, it is submitted that the Court ought not to have issued suit summons. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010479572026 NC: 2026:KHC:38783 WP No. 21733 of 2026 4. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and order of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court referred supra, this Court is passing the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. ii. The Trial Court is directed to consider I.A.No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, notwithstanding the fact that the summons is not served on the defendants. iii. Pending I.As if any, in the petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE DM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 28