Karnataka High Court
WP/26318/2026 of SRI B SURESH Vs SRI RAVI on 5 October 2026
CNR: KAHC010576492026 NC: 2026:KHC:55188 WP No. 26318 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 26318 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI B SURESH S/O LATE BOMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 55
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 26318 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI B SURESH
S/O LATE BOMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.27 AND 28,
18TH CROSS, RAJEEV GANDHI NAGARA,
BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU -560068.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ARUN K.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SRI RAVI
S/O BABU REDDY, RESIDING AT NO.1092,
19TH CROSS, 14TH MAIN ROAD,
HSR LAYOUT 3RD SECTOR,
BANGALORE-560102.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. VIJAYA PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE/MODIFY
THE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
DATED 30/07/2026 IN OS 5513/2026 ANNX-B ON IA NO. 1 BY XL ADDL. C.C. AND S. JUDGE BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
ORAL ORDER
The present petition is filed impugning the order dated 30.07.2026, whereby the Trial Court directed both parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit schedule property, issued notice on I.A. No.1/2026 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘CPC’), and also issued summons in the suit.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, by way of the application, a prayer was made to restrain the respondent herein from interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The Trial Court, however, directed both parties to maintain status quo. Consequently, the alleged interference with, and damage caused to, the petitioner’s pipelines continue to remain unaddressed.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that, having regard to the nature of the dispute and
HC-KAR
the reliefs sought in the suit and the application, the Trial Court was justified in directing the parties to maintain status quo.
4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned order.
5. In the present petition, it would suffice to direct the parties to maintain status quo, as directed by the Trial Court by order dated 30.07.2026, and to direct the Trial Court to finally adjudicate I.A. No.1/2026, filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the CPC, within a time-bound period.
6. In that view of the matter, the following order:
O R D E R
(i) The writ petition is disposed of.
(ii) Both parties are directed to maintain status
quo, as directed by the Trial Court by order
dated 30.07.2026, until consideration of I.A.
No.1/2026 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1
and 2 of the CPC.
HC-KAR
(iii) The Trial Court is directed to dispose of the
said application within one month from today.
(iv) The respondent is at liberty to file objections
to the said application within two weeks from
today.
(v) Both parties are at liberty to seek advancement of the case for the purpose of compliance with the aforesaid directions.
SD/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE
VBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17