1. All these petitioners who are not parties to the original proceedings in O.S.No.7758/2016 are before this Court to quash the orders dated 13.04.2017 and 17.07.2017 passed by the XX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH32) Bengaluru in respect of Sy.Nos.9/4 and 9/3 measuring 2 acre 11 guntas situated at Jakkur village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk.

2. The brief facts of the cases are that, the respondent No.1 who is the plaintiff in O.S.No.7758/2016 filed suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 in respect of the suit schedule property morefully described in the schedule to the suit, contending that the plaintiff was the owner of the suit schedule property and she is entitled to the relief sought for. The same was contested. The trial Court by judgment and decree dated 01.04.2017 decreed the suit, declaring that the plaintiff is the owner of the suit schedule property and further ordered that the registered agreement dated 03.08.1992 is barred by limitation and not binding on the plaintiff and further decreed that the defendant-Society or anybody on their behalf permanently restrained from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. The said decree passed by the trial Court in favour of first respondent-Nagarathnamma has reached finality.

3. After the decree passed by the trial Court, the original plaintiff filed an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for a direction to the Amruthhalli Police Station, Bengaluru North and Sub Registrar/Tahsildar, Yelahanka, Bengaluru North Taluk for protection of the suit schedule property, contending that the suit filed by the plaintiff-Nagarathnamma was decreed by the trial Court on 01.04.2017, restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property. Even after judgment and decree passed by the trial Court, the defendant Society is not allowing the plaintiff and her family members entering into the suit schedule property and the Society also taken temporary electricity connection from BESCOM in the suit schedule property illegally. Therefore, the plaintiff approached the Amruthhalli police station on 10.04.2017 and Sub Registrar/Tahsildar, Yelahanka, Bengaluru North Taluk for the protection of the suit schedule property and for change of revenue records.

4. The plaintiff also filed another application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure on 17.07.2017 to direct the Deputy Commissioner of Police North-East Division, Bengaluru (Amruthhalli Police) for protection to the suit schedule property and the Joint Commissioner, BBMP, Byatarayanapura, Bengaluru for transfer of katha and revenue documents of the suit schedule property in favour of the plaintiff, reiterating the averments made in the earlier application.

5. The trial Court considering the said applications, by the impugned order dated 13.04.2017, has recorded that in view of the submission made by the learned advocate for defendant Nos.2 and 3 that they have no objection to allow the application, it has issued direction to the Circle Inspector of Police, Amruthhalli Police Station to provide necessary protection to the suit schedule property as prayed in the I.A. and by the impugned order dated 17.07.2017, it has also directed the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East Division, Bengaluru (Amruthhalli Police) as well as the Joint Commissioner, BBMP, to provide police protection and to issue katha in respect of suit schedule property.

6. While passing the impugned order dated 17.07.2017, the trial Court recorded that, the learned Advocate for respondent No.3 filed a memo, who is representing the Special Officer, Karnataka State Kadhi and Village Industries House Building Cooperative Society that he has no objection for construction of the compound wall by demolishing the temporary sheds and for cancellation of the B