Karnataka High Court
Sri Odi Thomas vs Sri Suresh on 12 March, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:14944
W.P. No.15242/2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO.15242/2020 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. ODI THOMAS
S/O SRI. DEVSAIAH
AGE 51 YEARS
R/AT NO.164, PADAGURU
Digitally signed
by ARSHIFA GUNDLUPETE TALUK
BAHAR KHANAM CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT
Location: HIGH REP. BY HIS GPA HOLDER
COURT OF SRI. M.K. ANANTHANARAYANAN
KARNATAKA S/O LATE KRISHNA IYER
AGE 55 YEARS
R/AT DHANALAKSHMI NILAYA
SANDI BEEEDI, OPP. CHAMARAJESWARA
TEMPLE, CHAMARAJANAGAR.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. BHAT GANAPATHY NARAYAN, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SRI. SURESH
S/O SRI. PUTTAPPA
AGE MAJOR
R/AT. SHINDAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, GUNDLUPETE TALUK
GUNDULUPETE.
2. SRI. CHANDRU
S/O SRI. SHANTHAPPA
AGE MAJOR
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:14944
W.P. No.15242/2020
HC-KAR
R/AT SHINDANAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, GUNDALAPETE TALUK
GUNDALAPETE.
3. SRI. RAGHU
S/O SRI NAGESHAPPA
AGE 21 YEARS
R/AT. SHINDANAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI.
4. SRI. ARUN
S/O SRI RAJAPPA
AGE MAJOR
R/AT. SHINDANAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, GUNDALAPETE TALUK
GUNDALAPETE.
5. SRI. SHANTHAPPA
S/O SRI MUDHIYAPPA
AGE MAJOR
R/AT. SHINDANAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, GUNDALAPETE TALUK
GUNDALAPETE.
6. SRI. S.T. MAHADEVASWAMY
S/O SRI THAMANNA
AGE 31 YEARS
R/AT SHINDANAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, GUNDALAPETE TALUK
GUNDALAPETE.
7. SRI. SHIVAKUMAR
AGE 29 YEARS
S/O SRI MAHADEVAPPA
R/AT SHINDANAPURA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, GUNDALAPETE TALUK
GUNDALAPETE.
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 TO R7 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:14944
W.P. No.15242/2020
HC-KAR
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER OF DISMISSAL OF IA NO.1 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER DTD 24.02.2020 IN O.S.NO.190/2019 ON THE
FILE OF PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT GUNDLUPT
VIDE ANNX-L. QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF DISMISSAL
IN MISC.APPEAL NO.2/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER, DTD
16.09.2020 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
AT GUNDLUPET VIDE ANNX-N, CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE IA
NO.1 UNDER ORDER 39 RULE 1 AND 2 OF CPC FILED IN OS
NO.190/2019 ON THE FILE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC
AT GUNDLUPET & ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
"Issue WRIT of CERTORARI or any appropriate order by quashing the Impugned Order of Dismissal of I.A.No.1 filed by the petitioner, dated 24.02.2020 in O.S.No.190/2019 on the file of Principle Civil Judge & JMFC at Gundlupet as per Annexure-L, in the interest of justice and equity.
Issue WRIT of CERTORARI or any appropriate order by quashing the Impugned Order of Dismissal in Misc.Appeal No.2/2020 filed by the petitioner, dated 16.09.2020 on the file of Senior Civil Judge & JMFC at Gundlupet as per -4- NC: 2026:KHC:14944 W.P. No.15242/2020 HC-KAR Annexure-N; Consequently allow the I.A.No.1 under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 of CPC filed in O.S.No.190/2019 on the file of Principle Civil Judge & JMFC at Gundlupet, in the interest of justice and equity.
Grant such other and further reliefs as deemed fit, in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Sri.Bhat Ganapathy Narayan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondents- defendants on the ground that they are interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff. In the said suit, the plaintiff filed an application seeking for temporary injunction, which came to be rejected by the trial Court and the same is affirmed by the appellate Court under the impugned orders. It is submitted that this Court granted interim order of injunction, which is in force till this day and further submits that if the said interim order is continued till the disposal of the suit, the ends of justice would be met. Hence, he seeks to allow the petition. -5-
NC: 2026:KHC:14944 W.P. No.15242/2020 HC-KAR
3. Though the notice issued to the respondent is served, they remained exparte.
4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record.
5. The petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.190/2019 before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Gundlupet, (for short, 'the trial Court'), for the relief of permanent injunction and in the said suit the petitioner-plaintiff has filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of CPC seeking prayer of temporary injunction against the defendants on the ground that the petitioner-plaintiff has obtained the license for stone quarrying on 09.11.2018 from the Government of Karnataka and other concerned Department, despite the same, the defendants in the suit have stopped the vehicle of the plaintiff and tried to extract money from the plaintiff. The said application came to be rejected by the -6- NC: 2026:KHC:14944 W.P. No.15242/2020 HC-KAR trial Court vide order dated 24.02.2020. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed M.A.No.2/2020, which also came to be dismissed by affirming order of the trial Court.
6. It is to be noticed that the petitioner-plaintiff has made certain assertion in the plaint with regard to his possession over the suit schedule property based on the quarrying license issued to him by the State Government and the respondent-defendants are trying to disposes/objecting the plaintiff from carrying out the quarrying activity.
7. Be that as it may, the trial Court as well as the appellate Court considering the material on record, came to the conclusion that the petitioner-plaintiff has not made out prima-facie case to grant the relief of temporary injunction and those orders are challenged in the present petition.
8. It is to be noticed that this Court on 26.03.2021 has granted interim order as sought for in the application -7- NC: 2026:KHC:14944 W.P. No.15242/2020 HC-KAR and the said interim order is in force till this day, which is more than four years. It is also submitted that the O.S.No.190/2019 is pending before the trial Court. In my considered view, without going to the contentions advanced by the petitioner-plaintiff in the application for temporary injunction, interest of justice would be met if the interim order granted by this Court on 26.03.2021 is extended till the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.190/2019. The interim order dated 26.03.2021 reads as under:
"Issue emergent notice.
Stay as sought for, till next date of hearing."
The prayer sought in the application is as under:
"For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the applicant/petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant ad-interim order of temporary injunction restraining the respondents/defendants and their agents, servants or anybody claiming through under them from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule property in the interest of justice and equity."-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:14944 W.P. No.15242/2020 HC-KAR
9. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, writ petition is disposed of. The interim order dated 26.03.2021 granted by this Court is extended till the disposal of the O.S.No.190/2019 by the trial Court.
The trial Court shall not be influenced by the order of this Court nor the impugned orders passed by the Courts below.
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20