M/S. Griffin Events, Vs M/S Rk Enterprises @Rk Caterers and Kitchen

A DULY REGISTERED PROPRIETARY CONCERN ARN NO.AB290225135301K GSTIN NO.29DQMPS2501H3ZJ HAVING ITS PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS AT: BUILDING NO.FLAT NO.15A, SURVEY NO 118 & 119 ROAD/STREET : SNT ROAD CROSS NALA ROAD, LOCALITY/SUB LOCALITY: ULSOOR CITY/TOWN/VILLAGE: BENGALURU DISTRICT: BENGALURU URBAN STATE: KARNATAKA, PIN CODE - 560 608.

¶11

Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

ALSO AT: NO.34 SNT ROAD CROSS PADMANABHAN S. GANAPATHI STREET GUPTHA LAYOUT HALASURU BENGALURU (BANGALORE) URBAN KARNATAKA - 560 008.

¶13

DULY REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR: SRI SELVA KUMAR S/O. SRI PADMANABHAN

¶14

2 -

¶15

NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS R/AT: NO.34, SNT ROAD CROSS PADMANABHAN S. GANAPATHI STREET GUPTHA LAYOUT HALASURU, BENGALURU URBAN KARNATAKA - 560 008.

¶18

…PETITIONER

¶19

(BY SRI ABHISHEK, ADVOCATE)

¶20

AND:

¶21

M/S. R.K.ENTERPRISES @ R.K.CATERERS AND KITCHEN RESIDING AT NO.4 KARUMARI AMMA KOIL ST. HALASURU, M.V.GARDEN BANGALORE - 560 008. REPRESENTED BY: KALAIVANAN AND CHARLES @ DICO HOLY TRINITY CHURCH-CSI

¶22

REV. Y. JUSTIN PRESBYTER-IN-CHARGE.

¶23

MR. S. PUSHPANATHAN SECRETARY.

¶24

MR. J. KUMAR TREASURER.

¶25

MR. D'SOUZA DURAI PANDIAN MEMBER.

¶26

MR. ANBU SUVISESHAN S. MEMBER.

¶27

MRS. DHAYAMANI VINCENT MEMBER.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

MRS. DARTHY SHASHI MEMBER.

¶31

MR. CHARLES CLINTON MEMBER.

¶32

MR. SUNIL INBANATHAN MEMBER.

¶33

MR. YESUMITHRAN MEMBER.

¶34

ALL THEIR OFFICE AT: HOLY TRINITY CHURCH-CSI TRINITY CIRCLE, M.G.ROAD HALASURU, BANGALORE - 560 008.

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT LXXIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, TO CONSIDER THE I.A.NO.1 FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULES 1 AND 2 IN O.S.NO.25666/2025.

¶37

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

¶39

ORAL ORDER

¶40

Heard learned counsel for petitioner-plaintiff.

¶41

The petitioner is the plaintiff, who has instituted a

¶42

suit in O.S.No.25666/2025 against the respondentsdefendants before the trial Court seeking following reliefs:

¶43

4 -

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

"a. Pass a decree of permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant, its attorney, assignees, legal heirs, associates, etc. any such person acting on its behalf, from proceeding with or awarding the tender awarded to other event management services pertaining to Trinity Church Parish Hall Project;

¶47

b. Pass a decree of permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant, its attorney, assignees, legal heirs, associates, etc. any such person acting on its behalf, thereby restraining them from causing further delay in the tender selection process;

¶48

c. To pass such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstance of the case, may also be passed, in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants, to meet the ends of justice, including awarding costs of this proceedings, in the interest of justice."

¶49

Along with the plaint, the plaintiff has filed an

¶50

application in I.A.No.1 under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2

¶51

5 -

¶52

NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

read with Section 151 of CPC, wherein he sought for an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction restraining defendant Nos.2 to 12 from proceeding with the tender in favour of defendant No.1-M/s. R.K.Enterprises @ R.K.Caterers and kitchen and related reliefs. The affidavit was also annexed to the said application.

¶55

The trial Court, after hearing the petitionerplaintiff on the application for grant of an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction filed under XXXIX

¶56

Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, passed an order by issuance of emergent notice on I.A.No.1 with suit summons to the defendants if PF and charges are paid, returnable by 21.07.2025. Aggrieved by which, the petitioner-plaintiff is before this Court.

¶57

This Court does not find any need or necessity to

¶58

issue notice to the respondents, as the same is not yet served before the trial Court on the suit proceedings or on the application.

¶59

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

Learned counsel for petitioner-plaintiff contends that the trial Court, without expressing any reasons or providing any finding, has merely ordered for issuance of notice under the premise that without hearing the defendants, no order could be passed on the application. Hence, he seeks to allow his petition.

¶62

When an application is filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC in the suit proceedings, it is the duty and obligation of the trial Court to pass suitable orders on the said application by following Proviso to Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC, wherein the plaintiff is seeking relief of an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction before issuance of notice to the defendants as the delay in issuance of notice would cause irreparable hardship and injury to the plaintiff.

¶63

In those circumstances, it is provided in the provision that under extraordinary exceptional circumstances, if the trial Court is satisfied to grant such a

¶64

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

relief prior to issuance of notice to the defendants, the

¶67

same could be granted. It is not necessary in all cases that

¶68

the trial Court would have to issue emergent notice or hear the defendant/s before passing an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction. There are two stages arising out of the provision under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, i.e., to issue notice and thereafter, hear and pass orders when there is no urgency made out or the delay would not cause any harm to the plaintiff/s. However, on the contrary, when the delay in issuance of notice infringes the personal liberty, right or damage to the property or creates threat to the person or property of the plaintiff/s, the trial Court is obligated and duty bound

¶69

to pass a reasoned order to protect the plaintiff and preserve his property.

¶70

It is relevant to note that while deciding the

¶71

application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, the trial Court would have to adhere to the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Shiv Kumar Chadha

¶72

8 -

¶73

NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

v/s Municipal Corporation of Delhi and others reported in (1993) 3 SCC 161, Time City infrastructure and Housing Limited Lucknow V/s State of U.P. and others reported in 2025 SCC Online

¶76

SC 1674 , the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vedant Fashions Pvt. Ltd. v/s Smt.Rajul Devi reported in 2014 SCC OnLine Kar 7191 and also this Court in the case of Karnataka State Cricket Association v/s Mr. Shashidhara A.V. in

¶77

W.P.No.33725/2025 (decided on 17.11.2025) .

¶78

However, the fact is that in the present case on hand, the trial Court has not bothered to pass a reasoned order either to grant or reject an ad interim ex parte order of temporary injunction. Hence, the order passed by the trial Court is not sustainable.

¶79

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶80

ORDER

¶81

i) This writ petition is disposed of;

¶82

9 -

¶83

NC: 2025:KHC:50877 WP No. 32432 of 2025

¶84

HC-KAR

¶85

ii) The matter is remitted back to the trial Court to consider the application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC either to grant or reject and while doing so, the trial Court is bound to provide reasons either way.

¶86

iii) The trial Court shall decide the said application within a week when the plaintiff approach the trial Court.

¶87

iv) The petitioner-plaintiff is at liberty to advance the matter and seek relief from the hands of the trial Court;

¶88

v) The trial Court shall pass suitable orders without being influenced by any of the observations made herein;

¶89

vi) The trial Court shall follow due process of law and adhere to the provisions under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC, Proviso to Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC, the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the judgments of this Court, strictly.

¶90

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

¶91

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

¶92

CPN

M/S. Griffin Events, v. M/S Rk Enterprises @Rk Caterers and Kitchen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Griffin Events, v. M/S Rk Enterprises @Rk Caterers and Kitchen

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Kalpana Vs Chikkammariyamma Trust (R)

Sri Asadulla Khan Vs C R Venkatarathnaiah Shety

H K Chandrappa Vs Smt Nirmala

Sri Prince Ronald Reagan P Vs Mrs Marial Kavitha Balaraj @ Kavitha Balaraj

Mrs. Sheela T Vs Master Yohan Achut

M/S Davanam Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Pssv Incoporation