- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 2931 OF 2019 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. DR. ALLAN P PINTO S/O LATE SRI. JEROME A PINTO AGED 65 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER, R/A # 3, HAYES ROAD, BENGALURU. 2. SRI. IVAN TEXERIA S/O LATE SRI MICHAEL TEXEIRA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS COFFEE PLANTER, R/A SHIVA BAGH, MERCARA HILLS, MANGALORE. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.R.LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. AVITUS FERNANDES S/O LATE SRI PETER FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, COFFEE PLANTER, R/A SILVA ROAD, KANKANDY MANGALURU CITY - 575 002. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICT FIELD ROAD VIJAYANAGAR, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101. 4. TASILDAR MINI VIDHANA SOUDGA NO.57, NEAR HANUMANTHAPPA CIRCLE, VIJAYAPURA, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BHOJE GOWDA, AGA FOR R2; SRI. H.V. MANJUNATHA, ADVOCATE FOR R1) ------ THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH ANNEXURE-L DATED 13.11.2018 PASSED BY LEARNED PRINCIPAL, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CJM IN MA NO.23/2018 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER 1. The present Writ Petition seeks to challenge an order dated 13.11.2018 passed in an Appeal filed under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ("the CPC") seeking to challenge an Order dated 24.08.2018 passed by the learned Trial Court in IA No.1 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 CPC. The challenge in the present petition has been filed by the petitioners who are defendants before the learned Trial Court. 2. The learned Trial Court by its order dated 24.08.2018 allowed the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC restrained the petitioners/defendants or any person claiming through them from interfering with the peaceful possession of the suit Schedule No.1 and Schedule No.2 lands. The appeal filed by the petitioners/defendants against the learned Trial Court Order was also dismissed. The Learned Appellate Court gave a finding confirming the order passed the learned Trial Court. 3. This Court had briefly heard the parties on 05.01.2026 and had thereafter passed the following order. "2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants submits that so far as concerns that the plaint was filed by the respondent/plaintiff seeking to challenge the two properties and that the challenge in the present petition is only to the second property being the Schedule-II property, the details of which are set out below: "SCHEDULE-II PROPERTY Coffee Estate situated in Chikmagalur Taluk, Kandya Hobali, Bidare Village bearing Sy.No.292 measuring 10 Acres having following boundaries. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 East:Sy. No.12 and 13 West: Sy. No. 292 North: Doddahalla South: Sy.No.292, 6 & 5" 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants further submits that so far as this Schedule-II property is concerned, it is an admitted case of the respondent/plaintiff that schedule property neither belongs to the petitioners/defendants nor the respondent/plaintiff but to the Government. 4. Shri Bhojegowda, learned AGA who is present in Court is requested to take instructions whether or not either of the parties is in possession of the suit schedule properties. Let an appropriate affidavit be filed within two weeks from today.” 5. Let a copy of entire petition be supplied by the learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants to learned AGA latest by tomorrow." 4. As seen from the above, the petitioners had restricted his challenge in the present petition to the order allowing the injunction against the Schedule-II property alone. It was his contention that the Schedule-II property belongs to the Government. 5. Learned AGA has filed an additional affidavit in compliance of the order dated 05.01.2026. The affidavit dated 19.01.2026 in essence sets out that the Schedule-II property admeasures 219.14 acre/gunta and as per records the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 possession has been taken on 10.12.2021. It further sets out that neither party is in possession of the Schedule-II property. The operative portion of the affidavit dated 19.01.2026 is set out below : "3. I further submit that Reports from Assistant Commissioner, Chikkamagaluru Sub-Division and Tahsildar, Chikkamagaluru have been taken in this behalf vide Letter No.LND/CR/14024/10/2026(E- 1126129) dated 19-01-2026 and No. Khandya (e) CR/1125417/25-26 dated: 16-01-2026 respectively. Accordingly, an extent of 6-00 acres of government land in Sy No.292 of Bidare Village, Khandya Hobli, Chikkamagaluru Taluk was encroached by Avitos Fernandes S/o Late Peter Fernandes. The said encroachment of the land was evicted and vested with the government pursuant to the Order of the Deputy Commissioner, Chikkamagaluru vide No.M4/LND(CKM)94(A4)1/2021-22 dated: 10-12- 2021 (Annexure-1) and taken to the possession of the government and a name board was also affixed in this behalf. There are coffee plants in the said evicted land, but no maintenance is being made. The said property is in actual possession of the government, neither petitioners nor respondent are in possession of the said Suit scheduled property. Reports of Assistant Commissioner,Chikkamagaluru Sub-Divison and Tahsildar, Chikkamagaluru are enclosed herewith for kind perusal of the hon'ble Court. (Annexure-2 and Annexure-3) [Emphasis Supplied] 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants submits that, the suit Schedule II property, does not belong to the respondent plaintiff, but to the Government, thus the Impugned Order cannot be sustained. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 6. This contention is refuted by learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff and he however submits that, he is already in litigation with the Government to adjudicate this aspect including possession of the suit schedule property. 7. However, in terms of the affidavit filed, the possession of the suit Schedule II property is at present with the Government. Respondent/plaintiff has filed the suit before the learned Trial Court for injunction with respect to the suit Schedule-I and suit Schedule-II property. The suit is still pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court. Thus, it would be in the interest of justice that since there is no challenge to the Impugned Order qua suit Schedule-I property by the petitioners, the Impugned Order is sustained in relation to the Schedule-I property. 8. The Impugned Order is however modified directing the learned Trial Court to re-examine the grant of a temporary injunction qua the suit Schedule II property. 9. The petition is disposed of in the aforegoing terms. All pending applications stand closed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4087 WP No. 2931 of 2019 10. It is made clear that the rights and contentions of all parties are left open to be agitated before the learned Trial Court. (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE RS/BMV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18 Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA