ORDER

1. Petitioner was said to be the owner of the suit schedule property. In the year 2003, she has mortgaged the same in favour of respondent Nos.1 and 2 - Bank. She committed default in repayment of the loans. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 - Bank invoked their powers under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act') and brought the property to sale. The property was purchased by respondent No.3. She was put in possession of the suit schedule property by respondent Nos.1 and 2 - Bank. Thereafter, the petitioner has challenged the action of respondent Nos.1 and 2 - Bank by filing O.S.No.2147/2023 with the following prayers:-

"Wherefore, the Plaintiff in the above case most respectfully prays, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass.-

(i) That it be declared and adjudged that any claims, liens, mortgages, or other encumbrances asserted by Defendants 1 and 2 against the Suit Schedule Property are not binding upon the plaintiff, thereby affirming the plaintiff's uninhibited rights and interests in the property.

(ii) A consequential order for a permanent injunction, restraining Defendants 1 and 2, their agents, or anyone acting under them, from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the Schedule Property.

(iii) An order for a permanent injunction restraining Defendants 1 and 2, their agents, or anyone acting under them, from alienating, transferring, or dealing in any manner with the Suit Schedule Property.

(iv) That it be declared and adjudged that the sale certificate issued by & between Defendant No.1-4 and registered vide Document No.KEN-1-06028- 2016-17, Book I, Recorded in C.D.No.KEND 664 dated 04.11.2016, at the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Kengeri, are void, non-est in law, and hence not binding upon the plaintiff.

(v) An order for compensation to the plaintiff for mental agony, harassment, and legal expenses incurred due to the unlawful and non-binding actions of Defendants 1 and 2.

(vi) That it be declared and adjudged that any claims, liens, mortgages, or other encumbrances asserted by Defendants 3 and 4 against the Suit Schedule Property are not binding upon the plaintiff, thereby affirming the plaintiff's uninhibited rights and interests in the property.

(vi) A consequential order for a permanent injunction, restraining Defendants 3 and 4, their agents, or anyone acting under them, from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and enjoyment of the Schedule Property.

(vii) Prayer Against Defendant Nos.5 to 10 (Police Officials and Authorities):

a) Injunction:

An order for a permanent injunction, under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, restraining these defendants from any further illegal interference, dispossession, or harassment of the plaintiff in relation to the Suit Schedule Property.

b) Compensation:

An order for compensation to the plaintiff for distress, mental agony, and legal expenses incurred due to the actions of these defendants.

(viii) Against Defendant No.10 (The Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka):

Inclusion for compliance and enforcement purposes.

(ix) General Prayer:

The plaintiff prays for any other relief that the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interests of justice, equity, and good conscience.

(x) Costs of the Suit:

An order that the costs of the suit, including litigation expenses and other expenses, be borne by the defendants."

2. Petitioner also filed I.A.Nos.III and IV under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) for grant of ad-interim exparte temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner over the suit schedule property. Though an interim order was granted initially by way of an order dated 09.02.2024, the same was vacated. In the meanwhile, respondent No.3 herein made an application before the trial Court under Section 151 of CPC for restoration of possession. The trial Cou