Karnataka High Court
WP/24148/2026 of SRI. NARASIMHAPPA, Vs SMT. RATHNAMMA @ CHIKKA RATHNAMMA on 17 August 2026
CNR: KAHC010527722026 NC: 2026:KHC:43964 WP No. 24148 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO. 24148 OF 2026 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NARASIMHAPPA, S/O LATE. SUNKADA
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION NO. 24148 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1.
SRI. NARASIMHAPPA,
S/O LATE. SUNKADA GANGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS,
2.
SRI. CHIKKA ADEPPA,
S/O LATE. SUNKADA GANGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
3.
SRI. ADINARAYANAPPA,
S/O LATE. ASHWATHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
4.
SRI. VENKATESH,
S/O GANGADHARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
PETITIONERS NO.1 TO 4 ARE R/AT
B. BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE,
D. PALYA HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT - 561 213
5.
SRI. KRISHNAPPA,
S/O. LATE NARASIMHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT KADALAVENI VILLAGE,
Digitally
signed by
SUVARNA T
Location:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
HC-KAR
KASABA HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT -561 210
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. INDRADHANUSH CHAVAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
SMT. RATHNAMMA @
CHIKKA RATHNAMMA
W/O CHINNAPPAIAH,
D/O NARAYANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
2.
SMT. GANGARATHNAMMA
W/O HANUMANTHAPPA,
D/O NARAYANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
3.
SMT. GANGAMMA,
W/O LATE. GOWRAYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
4.
SRI. GANGANNA,
S/O LATE. GOWRAYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
5.
SMT. PAPAMMA
D/O LATE. GOWRAYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 5 ARE ALL
R/AT B. BOMMASANDRA VILLAGE,
D. PALYA HOBLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 561 213
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. INDRADHANUSH CHAVAN, ADVOCATE)
HC-KAR
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE WP
DIRECTING THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, GAURIBIDANUR TO CONSIDER THE IA NO. 1 IN OS NO.
SEEKING
TO
RESTRAIN
THE
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS FROM INTERFERING WITH THE
POSSESSION OF THE SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY BY THE
PETITIONERS
AS
EXPEDITIOUSLY
AS
POSSIBLE
IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
THIS
PETITION,
COMING
ON
FOR
PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
3
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers: “a) Allow the above Writ Petition.
b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus as per Annexure- ‘A’ directing the learned Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C, Gauribidanur to consider the I.A. No.1 in O.S. No. 270/2025 seeking to restrain the Respondents/Defendants from interfering with the possession of the Suit Schedule Property by the Petitioners as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.. c) Award any other costs and reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit in the above petition, in the interest of justice and equity.”
HC-KAR
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the plaintiffs have filed a suit seeking the relief of declaration and permanent injunction. In the said suit, IA No.1 was filed on 24.07.2025 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the CPC seeking order of temporary against the defendants. However, the Trial Court has failed to consider the said application.
3. In this regard, reliance is placed on the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in 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.
HC-KAR
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 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
HC-KAR
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."
4. 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.
HC-KAR
ii. Petitioners are at liberty to advance the matter. iii. All pending I.As., in the petition shall stand closed.
SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE
SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31