Dismissed¶72

Sri Maruthi v. Sri v Hombegowda

Karnataka HC10 Jun 2026WP/15257/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Article 227 certiorari/writ; interim injunction restraining alienation of suit schedule property; protection of possession of 35 guntas share per MOU; O.S. No. 2279/2025; M.A. Nos. 76/2026 and 77/2026; 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru/Bangalore Rural; GM-CPC; writ petitions dismissed; expedite trial; parties Maruthi v. V. Hombegowda and family (Immadihalli, Whitefield, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru); advocates Sridhara N. (petitioner) and Shivashankar K. (for R1); single judge Lalitha Kanneganti; NC: 2026:KHC:28089; decision date 10.06.2026.

What did the court decide?

None to the petitioners; incidental directions only — the trial Court shall dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible, and all I.As. in the petitions stand closed. ¶72

Sri Maruthi Vs Sri v Hombegowda — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:28089 WP No. 15318 of 2026 C/W WP No. 15257 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 15318 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)

¶9

C/W

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 15257 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)

¶11

IN WP No. 15318/2026

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

SRI. MARUTHI S/O V.HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT IMMADIHALLI VILLAGE, NEAR ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, WHITEFIELD POST, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK - 560 066

¶14

…PETITIONER

¶15

(BY SRI. SRIDHARA N., ADVOCATE)

¶16

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶17

AND:

¶18

SRI. V. HOMBEGOWDA S/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS

¶19

H.MANOHARA S/O HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶20

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.457, NEAR KARIMARAMMA TEMPLE IMMADIHALLLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU-560 066

¶21

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28089 WP No. 15318 of 2026 C/W WP No. 15257 of 2026

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

SMT. HEMAVATHI D/O V. HOMBEGOWCA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT BODANAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, DUNASANDRA POST, ANNUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 067

¶24

SMT. LAKSHMI @REKHA D/O V.HOMBEGOWDA W/O SOMANNA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO. A-6 DEVARAJ BUILDING, IMMADIHALLI, WHITEFIELD POST, BENGALURU -560 066

¶25

SMT. RAJESHWARI W/O MARUTHI AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

¶26

SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O V.HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶27

RESPONDENTS NO.5 AND 6 ARE RESIDING AT IMMADIHALLI VILLAGE, NEAR ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, WHITEFIELD POST, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK -560 066

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR K., ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶30

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR DIRECTION OR ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.05.2026 (ANNEXURE-A) PASSED IN M.A. NO. 77/2026 ON THE FILE OF 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL, IN ALLOWING M.A. 77/2026, I.A. NO. 1 (ANNEXURE-T1) RESTRAINING THE PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO 6 FROM ALIENATING THE

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:28089 WP No. 15318 of 2026 C/W WP No. 15257 of 2026

¶32

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY I.E. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF SUIT IN O.S. NO. 2279/2025 AND WERE FURTHER RESTRAINED FROM INTERFERING WITH THE POSSESSION OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN RESPECT TO HIS SHARE OF 35 GUNTAS REFERRED TO IN THE MOU UNTIL THE NEXT DATE.

¶35

IN WP NO. 15257/2026

¶36

BETWEEN:

¶37

SRI MARUTHI S/O V.HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT IMMADIHALLI VILLAGE, NEAR ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, WHITEFIELD POST, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK 560 066.

¶38

...PETITIONER

¶39

(BY SRI. SRIDHARA N., ADVOCATE)

¶40

AND:

¶41

SRI. V. HOMBEGOWDA S/O LATE VENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS

¶42

H.MANOHARA S/O HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶43

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.457, NEAR KARIMARAMMA TEMPLE IMMADIHALLLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU-560 066

¶44

SMT. HEMAVATHI D/O V. HOMBEGOWCA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS RESIDING AT BODANAHOSAHALLI VILLAGE, DUNASANDRA POST,

¶45

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28089 WP No. 15318 of 2026 C/W WP No. 15257 of 2026

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

ANNUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 560 067

¶48

SMT. LAKSHMI @REKHA D/O V.HOMBEGOWDA W/O SOMANNA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/AT NO. A-6 DEVARAJ BUILDING, IMMADIHALLI, WHITEFIELD POST, BENGALURU -560 066

¶49

SMT. RAJESHWARI W/O MARUTHI AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

¶50

SMT. JAYALAKSHMAMMA W/O V.HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

¶51

RESPONDENTS NO.5 AND 6 ARE RESIDING AT IMMADIHALLI VILLAGE, NEAR ANJANEYA SWAMY TEMPLE, WHITEFIELD POST, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK -560 066

¶52

...RESPONDENTS

¶53

(BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR K., ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶54

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTION OR ORDER SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02.05.2026 (ANNEXURE- A) PASSED IN M.A.NO. 76/2026 ON THE FILE OF 1^ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL, IN M.A. 76/2026, RESTRAINING THE PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO 6 FROM ALIENATING THE SUIT SCHEDULE PROPERTY I.E. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF SUIT IN O.S. NO. 2279/2025 AND WERE FURTHER RESTRAINED FROM INTERFERING WITH THE POSSESSION OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN RESPECT TO HIS SHARE OF 35 GUNTAS REFERRED TO IN THE MOU UNTIL THE NEXT DATE.

¶55

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:28089 WP No. 15318 of 2026 C/W WP No. 15257 of 2026

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

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

¶59

CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶60

ORAL ORDER

¶61

The petitioner has come before this Court questioning the order dated 02.05.2026 in MA.No.76 and 77/2026 on the file of the 1^st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural. WP.No.15318/2026 is filed questioning the order passed in M.A.No.77/2026 and WP.No.15257/2026 is filed questioning the order passed in M.A.No.76/2026.

¶62

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in one M.A., the trial Court had granted the reliefs that are sought in both the M.As. and in an interlocutory order, the trial Court had virtually granted the relief that is sought for in the M.A. and the trial Court ought not to have granted injunction in respect of 35 Guntas and also an injunction restraining the defendants from alienating the property.

¶63

Learned counsel for respondent No.1/plaintiff No.1 submits that after the defendants have entered appearance,

¶64

¶65

NC: 2026:KHC:28089 WP No. 15318 of 2026 C/W WP No. 15257 of 2026

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

now the main M.A. itself is being heard and at this juncture,

¶68

this Court may not interfere with the order impugned.

¶69

Having heard the learned counsels on either side,

¶70

perused the entire material on record. Considering the MOU that is referred in the order and as per that, the plaintiff has given 35 guntas of land. The trial Court, prima facie , considering the same had granted injunction not to alienate and this Court do not find any reason to interfere. Hence, this Court is passing the following:

¶71

ORDER

¶72

i. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed .

¶73

ii. However, the trial Court shall disposed of the case as expeditiously as possible.

¶74

iii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed.

¶75

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE

¶76

MEG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16

Sri Maruthi v. Sri v Hombegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Maruthi v. Sri v Hombegowda

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

Sri Nagesh N Vs Smt. Asha N

Sri. a. Narasimhan Vs Mrs. Chithra Panicker

Smt N Kavitha Vs R Ningappa Dead by Lrs

Sri. Muniraju Vs Smt. G a Sarvamangala

H.T Babu Vs Neravanda B Subbaiah Since Deceased by Lrs M N. Janaki

Trinetramilan Product Protection Solutions Private Limited Vs A.S. Narayanan