1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Court of the XIII Additional City Civil Judge, Mayo Hall, Bangalore (CCH-22) on I.A. No. II in O.S. No. 27417/09.

2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondents Nos. 3 to 5 and one more person (who was not made a party to the suit proceedings) availed of the financial assistance from the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. As the security for the repayment of the loan, they have also mortgaged the suit schedule property. As the said borrowers committed default in the payment of amounts, the entire loan was recalled. The respondent Nos. 1 and 2 initiated the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short). The appellant claiming to be the tenant approached the Civil Court seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession and the enjoyment of the suit schedule property. In the suit proceedings, the respondent No. 1 filed an application invoking Order VII, Rule 11(d) of CPC for the rejection of the plaint. The Trial Court, by its order, dated 2.6.201