Mr George Pearson Vs M/S Sunrise Group

M/S SUNRISE GROUP REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP BY ITS PARTNERS HAVING ITS REG. OFFICE AT NO.780, RAJBHAVAN 9TH A MAIN, INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 038.

¶12

Digitally signed by NANDINI M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI RAJANNA B S/O B. VARADAPPA AGED ABOUT MAJOR PARTNER M/S. SUNRISE GROUP REG. OFFICE AT NO.780 RAJBHAVAN, 9TH A MAIN INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE BANGALORE - 560 038.

¶14

SMT. M.S. DHANALAKSHMI W/O R. SHANKAR AGED ABOUT MAJOR PARTNER M/S. SUNRISE GROUP REG.OFFICE AT NO.780 RAJBHAVAN, 9TH A MAIN INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE

¶15

2 -

¶16

NC: 2025:KHC:51422 WP No. 9351 of 2020

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

BANGALORE - 560 038.

¶19

SRI JYOTHIR TEJMOY S/O R. SHANKAR AGED ABOUT MAJOR PARTNER M/S. SUNRISE GROUP REG.OFFICE AT NO.780 RAJBHAVAN, 9TH A MAIN INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE BANGALORE - 560 038.

¶20

SMT. PRABHAVATHI W/O SRI C.R. LAXMINARAYAN AGED ABOUT MAJOR PARTNER M/S. SUNRISE GROUP REG.OFFICE AT NO.780 RAJBHAVAN, 9TH A MAIN INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE BANGALORE-560 038.

¶21

SRI S. CHANDRA PRAKASH S/O LATE S. MUNISWAMY NAIDU AGED ABOUT MAJOR PARTNER M/S. SUNRISE GROUP REG.OFFICE AT NO.780 RAJBHAVAN, 9TH A MAIN INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE BANGALORE-560 038.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(NOTICE TO R-1, 2-3 TO R-6 ARE H/S, V/O DTD:17.06.2025 R-2 SERVED)

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS DATED 18.6.2020 PASSED IN O.S.NO.409/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT VIDE ANNEXURE-G TO THE EXTENT IT DOES NOT DISPENSE WITH THE NOTICE BEFORE CONSIDERING GRANT OF INJUNCTION AS PER I.A.NO.1 AND 2 (ANNEXURE-D AND E TO THE WRIT PETITION)

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

¶27

3 -

¶28

NC: 2025:KHC:51422 WP No. 9351 of 2020

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

ORAL ORDER

¶31

The plaintiff is before this Court in this petition filed

¶32

under Article 227 of Constitution of India with a prayer to set aside the order dated 18.06.2020 passed in O.S.No.409 of 2020 by the Court of III Additional Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Respondents who are served in the matter have remained unrepresented before this Court.

¶34

Petitioner herein has filed O.S.No.409 of 2020 before the Court of III Additional Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District seeking the relief of permanent injunction in respect of suit Schedule 'A' properties. Along with the suit, petitioner had also filed I.A.No.I and II under Order No.XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC. The trial Court vide the order impugned dated 18.06.2020 had issued suit summons and emergent notice on I.A.No.I and II to the defendants. Being aggrieved by the same, plaintiff is before this Court.

¶35

4 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:51422 WP No. 9351 of 2020

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶39

during the pendency of this petition, O.S.No.409 of 2020 is now transferred to Court of Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) at K.R. Puram and re-numbered as O.S.No.1153 of 2025. He submits that even as on this date, no orders have been passed on I.A.No.I and II. He also submits that this Court while issuing a emergent notice to the respondents on 07.09.2020 has directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the 30 feet wide road mentioned in sale deeds dated 28.06.2018 and 06.02.2020. He submits that this writ petition may be disposed of directing the trial Court to consider I.A.No.I and II filed in O.S.No.1153 of 2025 ( old O.S.No.409 of 2020) and till then the interim order granted by this Court may be continued.

¶40

I find some force in the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. The respondents who are served in this petition have remained unrepresented before this Court, though this Court vide order dated 07.09.2020 had directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of 30 feet wide road mentioned in sale deeds dated 28.06.2018 and 6.02.2020 and therefore, I am of the opinion that if this writ petition is

¶41

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:51422 WP No. 9351 of 2020

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

disposed of with a direction to the trial Court to dispose of I.A.No.I and II on merits as expeditiously as possible and till disposal of these applications, if the interim order granted in this petition is continued, the same would serve the ends of justice.

¶44

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the

¶45

trial Court to consider and dispose of I.A.Nos.I and II filed in O.S.No.1153 of 2025 (old O.S.No.409 of 2020) as expeditiously as possible and till disposal of the said I.A.No.I and II on merits, the interim order dated 07.09.2020 granted by this court, directing the parties to maintain status quo in respect of 30 feet wide road mentioned in sale deed dated 28.06.2018 and 06.02.2020 shall continue.

¶46

Sd/(S VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶47

NMS

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

Mr George Pearson v. M/S Sunrise Group

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr George Pearson v. M/S Sunrise Group

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. N. K. Premakumari Vs Shri. N. M. Siddu

R Shivamurthy Vs Smt. K Radha

Sri C Manohar Vs Sri S Meganathan

Sobha Forest View Apartment Owners Association Vs Sri. Chandrashekhar Gowda

Sri Anantharamaiah Vs Sri Rachaiah, Deceased by Hir Lrs

Dr Syamala Reddy Vs Smt. M Manju