Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
Ramachandra R S/o. Late Rangappa – Appellant
Versus
K H Parvathi Devi D/o Late Hanumaiah – Respondent
ORDER :
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. This petition is filed by the plaintiffs seeking the following reliefs.
a) Issue a writ of certiorari duly quashing the order dated 26.09.2025 vide Annexure 'A' passed by the VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, in O.S.No.1815/2025 on IA.No.1 filed by the petitioners under order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
b) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the learned judge of the trial court viz., Hon'ble VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, to consider and dispose of the I.A. No.1 filed by the petitioners under order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in O.S.No.1815/2025;
c) Grant such other relief/reliefs as this Hon'ble court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case, by allowing this writ petition, in the interest of justice and equity.
3. Petitioners are the plaintiffs and the respondents are the defendants before the trial Court in OS No.1815/2025.
4. Parties shall be referred to as per the status before the trial Court as plaintiffs and defendants.
5. Su
Trial courts must evaluate all materials presented in applications for injunctions and provide clear reasoning for their decisions, especially when considering ad-interim orders.
The trial Court must provide reasoned orders when dealing with applications for temporary injunctions, particularly in urgent cases, and should not simply issue mechanical orders without assessment.
Trial courts must evaluate and provide reasoning for injunction applications based on urgency and merits before requiring notice to the other party, as mandated by procedural rules.
The court must record reasons for granting ex-parte injunction without notice, making this requirement mandatory for valid exercise of jurisdiction.
The trial court must provide reasoning when deciding applications for temporary injunctions and cannot merely issue notices without addressing the merits of the request.
The failure to record reasons for granting an ex-parte injunction without notice constitutes a jurisdictional error and renders such orders unsustainable.
The court established that compliance with procedural requirements for granting ex parte injunctions is not optional but mandatory, and failure to adhere to these requirements invalidates the injunct....
Injunctions without notice require rigorous justification and must adhere to procedural safeguards, emphasizing the necessity of recording reasons for ex parte orders to uphold fair judicial process.
“3A Where an injunction has been granted without giving notice to the opposite party, the court shall make an endeavour to finally dispose of the application within thirty days from the date on which....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
