M/S. Green Fortune Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sri. Naveen Hegde

M/S. GREEN FORTUNE PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT LTD HAVING ITS REGD OFFICE AT SY NO 60 NIRMAL FARMS RAVINAGAR SUSGAON TALUKA MULSHI PUNE - 411021 AND HAVING ITS AFFILIATE OFFICE AT NO.187 NEW NO.84 1ST FLOOR SURYA LINK ROAD, MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE - 560003 REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI B NAGARAJAPPA

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

(BY SRI: HARSHA D JOSHI., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. NAVEEN HEGDE S/O VADIRAJ HEGDE AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT LOTUS RESIDENCY MANIK COLONY, CHINCHAWAD PUNE - 411 033

¶15

SMT SAROJAMMA W/O LATE A S KESHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS SINCE DEAD TO TREAT R3 & 4 AS LRs.

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:21735 WP No. 24233 of 2021

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

SRI K SATISH KUMAR S/O LATE A S KESHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS

¶19

SMT VEENA KUMARI D/O LATE A S KESHAVA RAO AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

¶20

RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 ARE RESIDING AT NO E79/78 4^TH MAIN ROAD CENTRE OF TEACHERS SOCIETY BSK 2^ND STAGE BANGALORE - 560 070

¶21

SRI NOORJAN S/O LATE CHOTTA SAB AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS RESIDING AT KOWDENAHALLI VILLAGE K R PURAM HOBLI BENGALURU EAST TALUK

¶22

SRI S THRILOKCHANDAR S/O SUGUNANTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.20A B BLOCK KRISHNAKUTIAR WHITE HOUSE OPP FCI GODOWN CHANNASANDRA KADUGODI POST BANGALORE - 560067

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI: M K BHASKARAIAH, ADV FOR R3 & 4; SRI: G B MANJUNATH, ADV FOR R5 R1 & 6 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶25

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDERS DATED 22.12.2021 IN O.S.NO.1749/2021 PASSED BY THE II

¶26

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:21735 WP No. 24233 of 2021

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU IN FAILING TO CONSIDER IA.NO.1 FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 BY PASSING AN EX-PARTE ORDER, THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶29

THIS WP, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶30

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

This petition is filed challenging order dated 22.12.2021 passed in OS No.1749 of 2021 by II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru and also sought writ in the nature of mandamus to the Trial Court to consider IA.1 and dispose of the same on merits.

¶33

Heard Sri Harsha D Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri M K Bhaskaraiah, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and Sri G B Manjunath, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5.

¶34

The petitioner has filed this writ petition mainly on

¶35

the ground that, despite urgency being expressed, the Trial

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:21735 WP No. 24233 of 2021

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

Court has issued emergent notice on IA.1 filed by the petitioner under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, without granting exparte injunction.

¶39

The records indicate that the petitioner herein has filed OS No.1749 of 2021 against the respondents herein for relief of declaration that Agreement of Sale dated 09.01.2015 is not binding on the plaintiff and other reliefs. In the said suit, the petitioner filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of CPC, seeking prayer of temporary injunction against the respondents, restraining them from alienating or creating any charge or encumbrance over the suit schedule property till disposal of suit. The Trial Court issued emergent notice on the said application.

¶40

It is contented that the said application was pressed and sought for ex-parte temporary injunction. However, the Trial Court declined the same and issued only emergent notice. It is to be noticed that this Court on 29.12.2021 has considered the prayer of the petitioner and ordered temporary injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or in any other

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:21735 WP No. 24233 of 2021

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

manner creating third party rights over the schedule property, until the next date of hearing.

¶44

The order sheet would indicate that the said interim

¶45

order is continued and suit is not proceeded further before the Trial Court. In my considered view, instead of keeping the present petition pending and recording the finding on merits, the interest of justice would be met, if the Trial Court is directed to consider the application - IA.1 on merits and dispose of the same.

¶46