Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
Karnataka State Cricket Association – Appellant
Versus
Shashidhara A V, S/o Late A P Vaikunta Karanth – Respondent
ORDER :
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
Heard learned senior counsel Udaya Holla on behalf of learned counsel Sri.Suraj Sampath and learned counsel Sri.C.K.Nandakumar, on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel Sri.Karan Gupta for the Caveator/ respondent.
2. This petition is filed by the petitioner/defendant in the original suit OS No.7680/2025, being aggrieved by the orders passed on IA Nos. 2 and 3 whereby the learned trial judge has granted an ad-interim order of temporary injunction against the petitioner/defendant and in favour of the respondent/plaintiff.
3. The parties shall be referred to as per their status before the trial Court as plaintiff and defendant, for the sake of brevity.
4. Brief facts of the case are as under:
Plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for the following reliefs.
a) Declare that the constitution of the Legal Advisory Committee at time of holding the Fifth LAC meeting dated 26.09.2025 and Sixth LAC meeting dated 13.10.2025 is improper and in violation of Bye-Laws of the Defendant Association.
b) Declare that the legal opinion in the Fifth LAC meeting dated 26.09.2025 is non-est;
c) Declare that the legal opinion in the Sixth LAC meeting dated 13.10.2025
The failure to record reasons for granting an ex-parte injunction without notice constitutes a jurisdictional error and renders such orders unsustainable.
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.
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.
“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 appeal against an ex-parte injunction is maintainable under Order XLIII Rule 1(r), affirming that the right to appeal is a statutory right.
The court emphasized that an ex-parte temporary injunction must comply with Order 39 Rule 3 of CPC, requiring the court to assign reasons for its decision, failing which the order is liable to be set....
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
