Karnataka High Court
WP/29172/2026 of MR K BHAGHYARAJA ALVA Vs MRS SANDHYA C SHETTY on 22 September 2026
CNR: KAHC010636962026 NC: 2026:KHC:52173 WP No. 29172 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND WRIT PETITION NO. 29172 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. MR. K. BHAGHYARAJA ALVA S/O LATE BABU ALVA
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
WRIT PETITION NO. 29172 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
MR. K. BHAGHYARAJA ALVA
S/O LATE BABU ALVA
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT FLAT NO.203, 2ND FLOOR,
PLAMA ICON APARTMENT,
OPP. POST OFFICE, PADAVU,
MANGALORE - 575 005.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VINOD KUMAR M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
MRS. SANDHYA C. SHETTY,
W/O CHANDRAHAS SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
R/AT KARAMOGERUGUTHU,
MULOOR VILLAGE,
GURUPURA POST,
MANGALORE - 574 145.
2.
MR. K. UDAY ALVA
S/O LATE BABU ALVA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
RESIDENT AT FLAT NO.101,
CLASSIQUE PEARL,
MEKKEDA GUDDE ROAD,
BIKARNAKATTE KAIMKAMBA,
SHAKTINAGARA NEW TOWN,
Digitally signed
by VINUTHA B
S
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
HC-KAR
MANGALORE - 575 016.
3.
MR. A. YATHIRAJ ALVA
S/O LATE BABU ALVA
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
RESIDING AT KARAMOGERUGUTHU,
MULOOR VILLAGE,
GURUPURA POST,
MANGALORE - 574 145.
4.
MRS. K. POORNIMA P. SHETTY,
W/O PRABHATH SHETTY
D/O LATE BABU ALVA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
RESIDING AT ABHIMAN HILLS,
FLAT NO.1402, NEAR LADIES CLUB,
LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD, HAMPANKATTA,
MANGALORE - 575 001.
5.
MRS. SHARMILA S. ALVA
W/O SASHIDHARA ALVA
D/O LATE BABU ALVA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.2-210/26, JAI HIND,
NEAR ELECTRICAL TOWER, NADUMANE,
KUDUPU POST, MANGALORE - 575 028.
…RESPONDENTS
(VIDE
O/D
22.09.2026
NOTICE
TO
RESPONDENTS
IS
DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 29.08.2026 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND CJM, MANGALURU IN O.S. NO.213/2026 ON I.A.
NO.II, INSOFAR AS IT REFUSED EX PARTE AD INTERIM
PROTECTION,
PRODUCED
AT
ANNEXURE
A
AND
CONSEQUENTLY GRANT AN EX PARTE ORDER OF AD INTERIM
TEMPORARY
INJUNCTION,
THEREBY
RESTRAINING
THE
RESPONDENT NO.3, HIS MEN, AGENTS OR ANY PERSON/S
CLAIMING THROUGH OR UNDER HIM FROM SELLING ARECA
HC-KAR
AND COCONUT YIELDS, WATER AND OTHER USUFRUCTS OF
THE PLAINT A AND B SCHEDULE PROPERTIES AND FROM
COMMITTING ANY ACTS OF WASTE OR DAMAGE TO THE SAID
PROPERTIES, AND TO GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/S AS THIS
HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE ABOVE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY
AND ETC,.
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND
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.
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner filed a suit for partition. In the said suit, an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure came to be filed, seeking a temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or damaging the suit schedule properties.
3. Pending disposal of the suit, the trial Court, by order dated 29.08.2026, issued notice on the I.A. as well as the suit and posted the matter to 21.09.2026.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that service is incomplete and that the matter now stands adjourned
HC-KAR
to 07.11.2026. Learned counsel further submits that, having regard to the nature of the property, the title as it stands as on the date ought to be preserved to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. It is contended that the trial Court, without considering the same, has not granted an ex parte injunction.
5. Considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. Considering the limited nature of the direction proposed to be issued by this Court, notice to the respondent is dispensed with. Both parties are directed to maintain status quo in respect of the schedule property, insofar as possession and title are concerned, till the adjudication of the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the trial Court.
7. As submitted, the next date of hearing before the trial Court is 07.11.2026. If service is completed before the said date, the petitioner is at liberty to seek advancement of the case.
HC-KAR
8. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE
DDU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29