- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 25939 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JYOTHI. M, D/O LATE VEDAVATHI, W/O RAGHAVENDRA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT ALILAGHATTA VILLAGE AND POST, HAGALAVADI HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT 2. SMT. TARA. M, D/O LATE VEDAVATHI, W/O N. RAVI KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NUGITHAHALLI VILLAGE, NANDI HOBLI, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUK AND DISTRICT 3. SRI. SANDEEP. M, S/O LATE VEDAVATHI, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT MADANAHALLI VILLAGE, GOWRIBIDANURU TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. YASHWANTH NETHAJI N.T., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K.V. NARASIMHAN, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 AND: 1. SRI. SATISH, S/O LATE VENKATARAVANAPPA, @VENKATARAMANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS. 2. SMT. NETHRAVATHI.C.R, W/O SATISH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 ARE R/AT NO.259, BURKANAHATTI, MADHUGIRI TOWN AND TALUK, TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 572 132 3. SMT. POOJA M.S. D/O SATISH, W/O ASHOK KUMAR, R/AT NO.259, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, BURKANAHATTI, MADHUGIRI TOWN AND TALUK TUMAKUR DISTRICT - 572 132 AND ALSO R/A NO.2796, 14TH MAIN ROAD, RPC LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040 4. SMT. SWATHI S. D/O. SATISH W/O. G.S.GANGADHAR AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT. IN FRONT OF RKN THEATER GUDIBANDE VILLAGE, POST AND TALUK CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 562 109 5. SMT. SHOBHA.M.S D/O SATISH W/O H.S.VINAY - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. R/T. HAGALAVADI VILLAGE AND POST GUBBI TALUKU - 572 222 TUMAKUR DISTRICT 6. SRI. NAGESH S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYANA @ NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT. DODDAVEERAGONDANAHALLI (V) BELLADAMADUGU GATE KASABA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUKU - 572 132 TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 7. SMT. NALINA S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYANA @ NARAYANAPPA W/O H.G. MUNIRAJU AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT. HARIHARAPURA (V) AVALAGURKI POST, CHIKKABALLAPUR TALUKU AND DISTRICT - 562 101 8. SMT. MALA B.N. W/O LATE HARISH AGE ABOUT 42 YEARS 9. SRI. SHARAN M.H. S/O LATE HARISH AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.8 AND 9 ARE R/AT DODDAVEERAGONDANAHALLI (V) BELLADAMADUGU GATE KASABA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUKU - 572 132 TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 10. SRI. RAGAVENDRA M.S. S/O LATE SRINIVASA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT BURKANAHATTI VILLAGE MADHUGIRI TALUKU - 572 132 TUMAKURU DISTRICT 11. SRI. NAGARAJ S/O LATE SRINIVASA R/AT. DODDAVERAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS BELLADAMADUGU GATE KASABA HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUKU - 572 132 TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 12. SMT. SUCHITHARA D/O. SATHYABHAMA W/O. JAGANATH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/AT. HONNAVALLI VILLAGE, ANGADI BEDI THIPATURTALUKU, TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 13. SMT. MAMATHA D/O. SATHYABHAMA W/O GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT. HALILUGATTA VILLAGE, HAGALAVADI HOBLI GUBBI TALUKU TUMAKURU DISTRICT. 14. SMT. SHASHI W/O LATE VISHWANATHA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 15. SRI. PUNITH S/O LATE VISHWANATH AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 16. SRI. PAVANA S/O LATE VISHWANATH AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.14 TO 16 ARE R/AT. BEHIND BACK OF BYATARAYANA SWAMY TEMPLE MASEEDI ROAD, TURUVEKERE TOWN AND TALUKU, TUMAKURU DISTRICT 17. SMT. RAJALAKSHMI M.V. D/O. LATE VENKATARAVANAPPA @VENKATARAMANAPPA W/O. H.R. NAGARAJASHETTY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.507, PETE BEEDI HONNAVALLI VILLAGE AND HOBLI TUMAKURU TALUK AND DISTRICT 18. SRI. PRO SHARAD BHAI. G S/O GOVINDARAO SAVANTH AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS 19. SMT. R.BELLI @ BELLI RAVIVARMA KUMAR W/O SRI GOSHAL AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT. NO.1 AND 2, NALANDA NO. 275, 8TH MAIN ROAD COFFEE BOARD LAYOUT, HEBBALA KEMPAPURA BANGALORE - 560 024. …RESPONDENTS - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED. ON I.A. NO.1 ON 01/08/2026 BY LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MADHUGIRI IN O.S. NO.159/2006, AT ANNEXURE-F. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court, questioning the order dated 01.08.2026 passed on I.A. No.1 in O.S. No.159/2026 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Madhugiri, whereby the Trial Court has issued an emergent notice on I.A. No.1, which is filed seeking an ad-interim injunction. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed the suit for partition. In the said suit, they have filed I.A. No.1 seeking an ad-interim injunction restraining defendant Nos.6 to 8, 10, 11, 18 and 19 from alienating the suit schedule property. The Trial Court, by order dated 01.08.2026, has issued emergent notice to - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 defendant Nos.6 to 8, 10, 11, 18 and 19 on I.A. No.1 and suit summons to the defendants, returnable by 31.08.2026. 3. It is submitted that when an application is filed seeking an ad-interim injunction, the Trial Court has to consider the same on the merits of the matter and cannot issue suit summons. 4. He has relied on the order passed by the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of 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, 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 - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 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." - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010564302026 NC: 2026:KHC:47112 WP No. 25939 of 2026 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, perused the entire material on record. Considering the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.35488/2025 (GM-CPC) dated 09.12.2025, this Court deems it appropriate to pass the following: ORDER i. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the trial Court to dispose of the I.A No.1 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, notwithstanding the fact that the suit summons were not served on the defendants. ii. The petitioners are at liberty to advance the matter before the Trial Court. iii. All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12