- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.2274 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI CHANDRASHEKARA H E AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SON OF ESHWARASHETTY H. S. 2. SRI. PRAMOD H. E. AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, SON OF ESHWARASHETTY H. S. 3. SRI. PRABHAKAR H. S. AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, SON OF SIDDALIGAPPA SHETTY, ALL ARE R/AT HOSALLI VILLAGE, ALDURU HOBALI, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 111 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. P.P. HEGDE, SENIOR COUNSEL APPEARING FOR SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI H.H. KRISHNAPPA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS, SON OF LATE HANUMASHETTY, R/AT HOSALLI VILLAGE, ALDURU HOBALI, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 111 2. SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR H.S. AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, SON OF SOMASHETTY, R/AT HOSALLI VILLAGE, ALDURU HOBALI, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 111. Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 3. SRI. K.T. RAJU AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, SON OF BASAPPASHETTY, R/AT KUMBARAHALLI, ALDURU HOBALI CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 101 …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRITS/ORDERS, QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-G PASSED BY THE COURT OF II ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT CHIKKAMAGALURU IN O.S.NO.328/2025 ALLOWING I.A.NO.4 FILED BY PLAINTIFF NO.2 / RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN THEREBY GRANTING POLICE PROTECTION FOR ENFORCING ORDER ON IA NO.1 AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER This petition by the defendants in O.S.No.328/2025 is directed against the impugned order dated 11.12.2025 whereby the application – I.A.No.4 filed by the plaintiff No.2 under Section 151 CPC seeking police help to enforce and implement the order of temporary injunction passed by the Trial Court on 24.09.2025 was allowed by the Trial Court by holding as under: “ORDERS ON I.A.NO.4 The Plaintiff No.1 has filed this application U/s 151 of CPC seeking to order for police help for enforcing the order - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 of the ad interim temporary injunction granted by this court on 24.09.2025 in the interest of justice. 2. In the accompanying affidavit, it is stated that plaintiffs have filed this suit against the defendants for the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. The plaintiffs have also filed the application grant of ad-interim temporary injunction and this court has allowed the said application and granted ad-interim and granted exparte ad-interim temporary injunction on 24.09.2025 in favour of the plaintiffs as prayed in the said application restraining the defendants, their men, agents or anybody claiming through them in any way from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint 'A' schedule property by making use of the plaint 'B' schedule road by the plaintiffs to reach the plaint 'A' schedule properties and also the pathway/footpath or causing any obstruction for transportation over the said road and pathway/footpath or putting gates across the said road and pathway/footpath pending disposal of the suit in the interest of justice. 3. It is further submits that subsequent to the orders passed by this court, the defendants have not complied the said order, but the defendants who has put the gates across the road mentioned in the ‘B' schedule of the plaint have also locked the gates which is in violation of the orders passed by this court. The plaintiffs have lodged the complaint to the Aldur Police on 23.10.2025 with regard to the illegal act of the defendants, but the said police have not taken any action against the defendants and hence, this - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 application filed since the defendants have violation the orders passed by this court the plaintiffs are not able to make use of the above said road as per the orders passed by this court. Hence, prays to allow the IA. 4. Hence, prays to allow the IA. 4. On the other hand, the defendant No.5 filed objection and contended that the application filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable either in law or on facts. It is further contended that the plaintiffs have sworn to a false affidavit, as they have not specified the specific reasons for seeking police help in enforcing of the temporary injunction. 5. The defendant No.3 further contended that the plaintiffs have filed the application just to harass and to prolong the proceedings of the case and thus to trouble the defendants. Since time immemorial there was gate fixed to the property of defendants and the defendants have using the said gate for visit the property and to lock the same, without anybody's objections etc. Further the plaintiffs have not sought any relief over the said gate in their plaint and further to remove the gate. The gate fixed to their property since long period of years and for the existence of the said gate the plaintiffs themselves have produced photographs of the said gate. On 04.07.2025 there was defendants gate and after their work locked the said gate and went to their houses, but on 05.07.2025 as usual the defendants came to their property by that time they say that the said gate was broken and taken away with medicine boxes and hence, in this regard the defendant No.3 has lodged the complaint before the Aldur Police on 05.07.2025 and inturn the said - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 police authorities have issued endorsement to obtain the permission from the court to register the case and hence, the defendant No.3 got obtained the permission from this court and said case is under progress. 6. The defendant No.3 further contended that before filing of the present suit by the plaintiffs, there was the existing iron gate and for removal of said gate there is no any orders from this court in favour of the plaintiffs. Hence, prays to dismiss the IA. 7. Heard the Learned Counsel for Plaintiffs and defendants. 8. On perusal, the following points arise for my consideration:- 1. Whether the Plaintiff No.1 has made out grounds to allow application under Section 151 of CPC to provide police protection? 2. What Order? 9. My findings to the above points are as under:- Point No.1: In the Affirmative. Point No.2 : As per final order for the following: REASONS 10. Point No.1:- The plaintiffs have filed the suit for declaration and for permanent injunction against the defendants to restraining them from interfering with peaceful use of the plaint ‘B' schedule road and pathway/footpath or - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 causing any obstruction for transportation over the said road and pathway/footpath or putting gates across the said road and pathway/ footpath. 11. Admittedly after being heard the arguments of both parties and after scrutinization of the documents this court has passed temporary injunction order against the defendants on 24.09.2025 and restraining the defendants, their men, agents or anybody claiming through them in any way from interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful possession and enjoyment of the plaint 'A' schedule property by making use of the plaint ‘B' schedule road by the plaintiffs to reach the plaint 'A' schedule properties and also the pathway/footpath or causing any obstruction for transportation over the said road and pathway/footpath or putting gates across the said road. 12. Now the plaintiffs are contended that subsequent to the orders passed by this court. The defendants have not - complied the said order, but the defendants who have put the gate across the road mentioned in the ‘B' schedule and also locked the gate which is in violation of the orders passed by this court. Further they have produced the photo on perusal of the same, it appears that the defendants have locked the gate. On the contrary the counsel for the defendant submitted that there was existing iron gate and for removed of said gate there is no any orders from this court and further in support of the averments, the plaintiffs have produced acknowledgment given by the Aldur Police Station. On perusal of the materials produced by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 plaintiffs it discloses that the defendants are not allowing the plaintiff to use the B' schedule road and further the documents produced by the defendants it discloses that the defendants have challenged the same before the Hon'ble 1st Addl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chikkamagaluru in MA No.14/2025. However, there is no any stay accordingly order passed by this court still existence. Hence, it is settled principle of law that in order to give fruits of the order of this court, it is just and necessary to provide the police protection by directing the concerned jurisdiction police to give protection to the plaintiff in the event of any interference by the defendants. Accordingly, the Point No. 1 is answered in the Affirmative. 13. Point No.2: In view of the aforesaid reasons, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER The IA No.4 filed by the plaintiff No.2 U/s 151 of CPC is hereby allowed. Consequently, the jurisdictional police is hereby directed to give necessary police protection for enforcing the order on IA No.1. For compliance of Section 89 of CPC. Call on 14.01.2025.” 2. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the respondents-plaintiffs instituted the aforesaid suit against the petitioners-defendants for declaration, permanent injunction and - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 other reliefs in relation to the suit schedule property. Along with the suit, respondents-plaintiffs filed application-I.A.No.1, which was opposed by the petitioners-defendants and the said application came to be allowed by the Trial Court vide Order dated 24.09.2025. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed an appeal in M.A.No.14/2025 on 24.10.2025 along with an application for stay. It is the grievance of the petitioners that despite the petitioners having filed an application seeking stay in M.A.No.14/2025, the First Appellate Court is not considering the same even as on today and the respondents are unnecessarily protracting the proceedings and in the meantime, the Trial Court has proceeded to pass the impugned order, aggrieved by which, the petitioners are before this Court by way of the present petition. 3. Though several contentions have been urged by the petitioners in support of their respective claim, having regard to the fact that the appeal before the First Appellate Court along with I.A.No.1 for stay stands posted before the First Appellate Court in M.A.No.14/2025 on 09.02.2026, without expressing any opinion on the merits / demerits of the case, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of this petition directing the First Appellate Court to - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5141 WP No. 2274 of 2026 consider and pass appropriate orders on I.A.No.1 filed in M.A.No.14/2025 on or before 21.02.2026. 4. All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. 5. It is needless to state that the impugned order passed by the Trial Court on I.A.No.4 would be subject to the final outcome of orders to be passed on I.A.No.1 in M.A.No.14/2025. 6. Subject to aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE SV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59