Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.12328 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
BHASKARSOPAN CHAUDHARI,
S/O LATE SOPAN TUKARAM CHAUDHARI,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
RD
R/AT, #653, 3 PHASE,
IV STAGE, VIJAYANAGARA,
DEVARAJA MOHALLA,
MYSURU -17
REP. BY ITS GPA HOLDER,
SHRIKRISHNA DINKAR CHAUDHARI,
S/O DINKAR SOPAN CHAUDHARI,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
TH ND
R/AT #2916, 5 CROSS, 22 MAIN,
VIJAYANAGARA II STAGE,
DEVARAJA MOHALLA, MYSURY-17
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJESWARA P N., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
CHANDANA
B M
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
AND:
1. M MAHADEVU
S/O MADAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO.428, NEAR RAVA MILL,
KOORGALLY, YELAWALA HOBLI,
MYSURU- 571130
2. DINESH J R
S/O. RAJEGOWDA S,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
R/AT JAINAHALLI VILLAGE,
AKKIHEBBAL HOBLI,
K R PETE TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 426
3. THE COMMISSIONER
TOWN MUNICIPAL OFFICE,
HOOTAGALLI
MYSURU 17
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VENKATESH S.ARBATTI AND
SRI K.S.HARISH, ADV. FOR C/R2
SRI G.M.ANANDA, ADV. FOR R3
V/O/DT: 12.8.2025,
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 01.03.2025 IN M.A. NO.14/2025 BY THE HON'BLE VI ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE, MYSURU (ANNEXURE-A) AND
ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition by the plaintiff in O.S.No.141/2025 is directed
against the impugned order dated 17.02.2025, whereby the
application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for temporary injunction
was dismissed by the trial Court and confirmed by the First
Appellate Court, which dismissed the appeal in M.A.No.14/2025
vide impugned order dated 01.03.2025.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the caveator/respondent No.2, learned counsel for
respondent No.3 and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the
petitioner/plaintiff instituted aforesaid suit against the
respondents/defendants, in which he filed an application for
temporary injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from
putting up any construction on 'A' and 'B' schedule properties till
disposal of the suit. The said suit and application having been
contested by the respondents/defendants, the trial Court passed an
order dated 17.02.2025 dismissing the application, aggrieved by
which the petitioner approached the First Appellate Court, which
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
also dismissed the appeal vide final order dated 01.03.2025.
Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the trial Court and
First Appellate Court, the petitioner approached this Court by way
of the present petition, in which this Court passed following interim
order dated 09.06.2025.
"Learned counsel for caveator has remained
absent both in the forenoon and afternoon.
In the light of prima facie case on behalf of the
petitioner, there shall be an interim order of stay as
prayed for till the next date of hearing."
4. If the interim order passed by this Court is read in
conjunction with the interim relief sought for by the
petitioner/plaintiff, it is clear that this Court restrained the
respondents from putting up further construction on the suit 'A' and
'B' schedule properties. The said interim order continues to remain
in force and operates against the respondents even till today.
During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner has filed
an application-I.A.No.2/2025 for direction and I.A.No.3/2025 to
initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents/defendants
inter alia contending that they had violated the aforesaid interim
order dated 09.06.2025 passed by this Court.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
5. Both the present petition and the applications filed by
the petitioner are vehemently opposed by the respondents, who not
only support the impugned orders but contend that after the interim
order was communicated to respondent Nos.1 and 2, the
respondents have not put up any further construction over the suit
schedule properties.
6. A perusal of the material on record, in particular the
latest photographs produced by the parties will indicate that the
external structure of the building has been completed and finishing
work/interiors only remain to be completed in the building.
7. Under these circumstances though several contentions
have been urged by both sides in support of their respective
claims, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of
the rival contentions, I deemed it just and appropriate to dispose of
this petition by issuing certain directions.
8. In the result, the following:
ORDER
i) Petition is disposed of .
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
ii) The impugned orders dated 17.02.2025 passed
by the trial Court and 01.03.2025 passed by the
First Appellate Court are hereby modified.
iii) Respondent No.2 is permitted to complete the
interiors and finishing work of the building as
indicated in the photographs.
iv) Respondent No.2 shall not put up any further
construction on the suit schedule properties till
disposal of the suit.
v) The construction already put up by respondent
No.2 and the finishing and interior work to be
done by respondent No.2 of the building would be
at his risk and cost and subject to the final
outcome of the suit and respondent No.2 shall not
claim any equities in this regard and the same
would be without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the parties.
vi) It is further directed that in the event the plaintiff
succeeds in the suit, the respondents would either
demolish and hand over vacant possession of the
suitable property to the petitioner/plaintiff or
deliver possession of the property with the
existing building, without driving the
petitioner/plaintiff to seek amendment of the plaint
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
or file an application or file a separate suit or
initiate any other proceedings.
vii) It is further directed that the respondents shall not
alienate, encumber, dispose of or create third
party rights over the building till disposal of the
suit by the trial Court.
viii) The trial Court before whom the suit is posted on
18.06.2026 is directed to prepone the suit from
18.06.2026 to 23.02.2026 and dispose of the suit
within a period of four months from 23.02.2026.
ix) Liberty is reserved in favour of both the parties to
file an application seeking preponement/
advancement of the suit from 18.06.2026 to
23.02.2026.
x) It is made clear that this interim arrangement is
made without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the parties and would be subject to
the final outcome of the suit.
xi) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter
are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the
merits/demerits of the rival contentions.
xii) Liberty is also reserved in favour of the petitioner
to file an application under order 39 Rule 2A of
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
CPC before the trial Court. It is needless to state
that if the petitioner files such an application, the
respondents would be entitled to contest the
same and the trial Court shall proceed further in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
VM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 13 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.12328 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
BHASKARSOPAN CHAUDHARI,
S/O LATE SOPAN TUKARAM CHAUDHARI,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
RD
R/AT, #653, 3 PHASE,
IV STAGE, VIJAYANAGARA,
DEVARAJA MOHALLA,
MYSURU -17
REP. BY ITS GPA HOLDER,
SHRIKRISHNA DINKAR CHAUDHARI,
S/O DINKAR SOPAN CHAUDHARI,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
TH ND
R/AT #2916, 5 CROSS, 22 MAIN,
VIJAYANAGARA II STAGE,
DEVARAJA MOHALLA, MYSURY-17
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RAJESWARA P N., ADVOCATE)
Digitally
signed by
CHANDANA
B M
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
AND:
1. M MAHADEVU
S/O MADAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT NO.428, NEAR RAVA MILL,
KOORGALLY, YELAWALA HOBLI,
MYSURU- 571130
2. DINESH J R
S/O. RAJEGOWDA S,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
R/AT JAINAHALLI VILLAGE,
AKKIHEBBAL HOBLI,
K R PETE TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT 571 426
3. THE COMMISSIONER
TOWN MUNICIPAL OFFICE,
HOOTAGALLI
MYSURU 17
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VENKATESH S.ARBATTI AND
SRI K.S.HARISH, ADV. FOR C/R2
SRI G.M.ANANDA, ADV. FOR R3
V/O/DT: 12.8.2025,
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
DATED 01.03.2025 IN M.A. NO.14/2025 BY THE HON'BLE VI ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SPECIAL JUDGE, MYSURU (ANNEXURE-A) AND
ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
This petition by the plaintiff in O.S.No.141/2025 is directed
against the impugned order dated 17.02.2025, whereby the
application filed by the petitioner/plaintiff for temporary injunction
was dismissed by the trial Court and confirmed by the First
Appellate Court, which dismissed the appeal in M.A.No.14/2025
vide impugned order dated 01.03.2025.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the caveator/respondent No.2, learned counsel for
respondent No.3 and perused the material on record.
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the
petitioner/plaintiff instituted aforesaid suit against the
respondents/defendants, in which he filed an application for
temporary injunction restraining the respondents/defendants from
putting up any construction on 'A' and 'B' schedule properties till
disposal of the suit. The said suit and application having been
contested by the respondents/defendants, the trial Court passed an
order dated 17.02.2025 dismissing the application, aggrieved by
which the petitioner approached the First Appellate Court, which
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
also dismissed the appeal vide final order dated 01.03.2025.
Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the trial Court and
First Appellate Court, the petitioner approached this Court by way
of the present petition, in which this Court passed following interim
order dated 09.06.2025.
"Learned counsel for caveator has remained
absent both in the forenoon and afternoon.
In the light of prima facie case on behalf of the
petitioner, there shall be an interim order of stay as
prayed for till the next date of hearing."
4. If the interim order passed by this Court is read in
conjunction with the interim relief sought for by the
petitioner/plaintiff, it is clear that this Court restrained the
respondents from putting up further construction on the suit 'A' and
'B' schedule properties. The said interim order continues to remain
in force and operates against the respondents even till today.
During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner has filed
an application-I.A.No.2/2025 for direction and I.A.No.3/2025 to
initiate contempt proceedings against the respondents/defendants
inter alia contending that they had violated the aforesaid interim
order dated 09.06.2025 passed by this Court.
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
5. Both the present petition and the applications filed by
the petitioner are vehemently opposed by the respondents, who not
only support the impugned orders but contend that after the interim
order was communicated to respondent Nos.1 and 2, the
respondents have not put up any further construction over the suit
schedule properties.
6. A perusal of the material on record, in particular the
latest photographs produced by the parties will indicate that the
external structure of the building has been completed and finishing
work/interiors only remain to be completed in the building.
7. Under these circumstances though several contentions
have been urged by both sides in support of their respective
claims, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of
the rival contentions, I deemed it just and appropriate to dispose of
this petition by issuing certain directions.
8. In the result, the following:
ORDER
i) Petition is disposed of .
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
ii) The impugned orders dated 17.02.2025 passed
by the trial Court and 01.03.2025 passed by the
First Appellate Court are hereby modified.
iii) Respondent No.2 is permitted to complete the
interiors and finishing work of the building as
indicated in the photographs.
iv) Respondent No.2 shall not put up any further
construction on the suit schedule properties till
disposal of the suit.
v) The construction already put up by respondent
No.2 and the finishing and interior work to be
done by respondent No.2 of the building would be
at his risk and cost and subject to the final
outcome of the suit and respondent No.2 shall not
claim any equities in this regard and the same
would be without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the parties.
vi) It is further directed that in the event the plaintiff
succeeds in the suit, the respondents would either
demolish and hand over vacant possession of the
suitable property to the petitioner/plaintiff or
deliver possession of the property with the
existing building, without driving the
petitioner/plaintiff to seek amendment of the plaint
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
or file an application or file a separate suit or
initiate any other proceedings.
vii) It is further directed that the respondents shall not
alienate, encumber, dispose of or create third
party rights over the building till disposal of the
suit by the trial Court.
viii) The trial Court before whom the suit is posted on
18.06.2026 is directed to prepone the suit from
18.06.2026 to 23.02.2026 and dispose of the suit
within a period of four months from 23.02.2026.
ix) Liberty is reserved in favour of both the parties to
file an application seeking preponement/
advancement of the suit from 18.06.2026 to
23.02.2026.
x) It is made clear that this interim arrangement is
made without prejudice to the rights and
contentions of the parties and would be subject to
the final outcome of the suit.
xi) All rival contentions on all aspects of the matter
are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the
merits/demerits of the rival contentions.
xii) Liberty is also reserved in favour of the petitioner
to file an application under order 39 Rule 2A of
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9083
WP No. 12328 of 2025
HC-KAR
CPC before the trial Court. It is needless to state
that if the petitioner files such an application, the
respondents would be entitled to contest the
same and the trial Court shall proceed further in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
VM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4