[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Gulbarga Cement Ltd vs Mr Shivappa Julphi on 6 March, 2026
Author: S.Vishwajith Shetty
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
WP No. 201090 of 2026
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT PETITION NO. 201090 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
GULBARGA CEMENT LTD.,
REGD OFFICE MALLIK'S EMBASSY NO.9,
" S B BLOCK" 2ND FLOOR,
UNION STREET OFF INFANTRY ROAD,
CUBBON CROSS ROAD, BANGALURU-560001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
MR. R. K. NAGESH,
OFFICE GULBARGA CEMENT LTD,
1ST FLOOR DR. ABID SR RESIDENCY,
OLD JEWARGI ROAD, OPP. L. R. RATHI HOSPITAL,
KALABURAGI-585102.
Digitally signed by ...PETITIONER
SWETA KULKARNI
Location: HIGH (BY SRI. SHIVALING N. PADSHETTY, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. MR. SHIVAPPA JULPHI
S/O SHIVASARANAPPA JULPHI,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
2. MR. SHANKAR GOBBURA
S/O ERANNA GOBBURA,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
WP No. 201090 of 2026
HC-KAR
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
3. MR. ERANNA ULLAGADDI
S/O REVAPPA ULLAGADDI,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
4. MR. PRABHU BYRAMADAGI
S/O ERANNA BYARAMADAGI,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
5. MR. NAGAPPA POOJARI S/O NINGAPPA,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
6. MR. BHAGWANT KHABA
S/O HANUMANTHARAYA KHABA,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
7. MR. BHAGWANT DANDGUND
S/O SANGANNA DANDGUNDA,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
8. MR. BASAVARAJ GOBBURA S/O SANGANNA,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
9. MR. SHARANAPPA NARIBOLI S/O NINGAPPA,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
WP No. 201090 of 2026
HC-KAR
10. MR. BABU JULPHI
S/O BHIMMANA JULPHI,
AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
11. MR. BHIMASHANKAR
S/O SHIVAPPA SARADAG,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O KIRANAGI VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585308.
12. MR. LATHEEF JAGIRDAR
S/O SHAIK MEHABOOB,
AGE: 75 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O FEROZABAD VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585310.
13. MR. BASAVARAJ S/O BABU MALAKAPPA,
AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC; AGRICULTURE,
R/O. FEROZABAD VILLAGE, TQ. KALABURAGI,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585310.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT
PETITION AND QUASH THE ADJOURNMENT ORDER
(ANNEXURE-F) OF DATED 28/02/2026, GRANTING AN AEON
TIME PERIOD TO ON 01/04/2026, FOR THE PURPOSE TO FILE
OBJECTIONS AND HEAR ON IA-1, BY LEARNED II ADDL JUNIOR
CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC KALABURAGI IN O.S.47/2026 AND
KINDLY BE ORDERED TO ALLOW SAID IA-1.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
WP No. 201090 of 2026
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
1. The plaintiff is before this Court in this writ
petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
seeking for the following relefs:
"Wherefore, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to allow the writ petition and quash the
adjournment order (Annexure-F) of dated 28.02.2026
granting an aeon time period to on 01.04.2026 for the
purpose to file objections and hear on I.A.No.1, by
learned II Addl. Junior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kalaburagi
in O.S.No.47/2026 and kindly be ordered to allow said
I.A.No.1 in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The plaintiff has filed O.S.No.47/2026 before the
Court of Junior Civil Judge and JMFC Court, Kalaburagi,
seeking relief of permanent injunction against the defendants
who are arraigned as respondents in this writ petition,
restraining them from unlawfully trespassing into the suit
schedule property and interfering with the project work of
the plaintiff company in the suit schedule property.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
HC-KAR
4. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that, the
suit schedule property totally measuring 1821 acres situated
at Ferozabad, Kiranagi and Somanathahalli of Gulbarga taluk
and district is allotted to the plaintiff/company by the
Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board on
26.08.2014. Subsequently, on 20.01.2023, after receiving a
sum of Rs.2,18,52,00,000/- from the plaintiff/company as
premium of the rent reserved, registered lease deed has been
executed by KIADB in favour of the plaintiff/company.
Defendants, who have no right whatsoever over the suit
schedule property are unnecessarily trespassing into the suit
schedule property and interfering with the project work of the
plaintiff. It is under these circumstances, plaintiff/company had
approached the jurisdictional Civil Court and has filed a suit in
OS No.47/2026 and in the said suit, IA No.1 is filed under
Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Rule 2 of CPC seeking ex-parte
temporary injunction against defendants. He submits that the
Trial Court till date has not considered IA No.1 though the suit
was filed on 06.02.2026 itself and on the other hand, suit
summons is already served on the defendants and the matter is
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
HC-KAR
adjourned at the instance of some of the defendants, who have
entered appearance.
5. He submits that under similar circumstances, the
Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of N. A. Haris vs.
Rajiv Hegde and Others i.e., WP.No.13992/2012 disposed off
on 07.03.2014 having taken note that the Trial Court had
adjourned the suit after service of notice to the defendants
beyond a period of one month has directed the Trial Court to
consider the application for temporary injunction within time
frame.
6. Perusal of the order sheet in OS No.47/2026 would
go to show that all the defendants have been already served.
The Trial Court on 28.02.2026 at the request of some of the
defendants, who were represented before the Court has
adjourned the matter to 01.04.2026 to enable them to file
objections to IA No.1 though learned counsel for the plaintiff -
company had insisted to pass an order on the application
having regard to the urgency.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
HC-KAR
7. In the case of N. A. Haris (supra), in almost
identical circumstances, this Court has directed the Trial Court
to take up the application for temporary injunction for hearing
immediately and to dispose off the same within 7 days from the
date of receipt of the order passed in the said case. In
paragraph No.5 of the order passed in the said case, it is
observed as follows:-
"5. .... Once notice is duly served and the defendant
enters appearance, the requirement of Rule 3 is
complied with. The Court can proceed to pass
orders after hearing the parties. If the defendant
wants the Court to consider his defence, he must
file his objections on his appearance. It is for that
purpose the notice is issued. The Court is under an
obligation to hear the parties at the earliest and
pass an order on merits, one way or the other. If
the Court declines to grant an order of temporary
injunction, the plaintiff has a remedy by way of an
appeal. He cannot have any grievance against the
Court. But, after approaching the Court he is
neither granted an interim order nor his application
is heard and decided on merits after appearance of
the defendant and in the meanwhile his or her
rights are affected, injury is caused, then it would
be a case of injury being caused to him by the in
NC: 2026:KHC-K:2196
HC-KAR
action on the part of the Court and not by the
opposite party. Because all that is expected of him
or her has been done, but still his or her case is not
heard and no orders are passed. Such a situation is
to be avoided at any cost by the Courts."
8. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion that
even this writ petition is required to be disposed off directing
the Trial Court to take up the application IA No.1 in OS
No.47/2026 filed by the plaintiff - company seeking an order of
temporary injunction for hearing immediately and to dispose off
the said application within a period of seven days from the date
of receipt of certified copy of this order.
9. Writ petition is disposed off accordingly.
Sd/-
(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)
JUDGE
SVH,DN
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18
CT:PK
