IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 28614 OF 2018 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI NARASARAJAIAH, S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT ANUPANAHALLI VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 140.

…PETITIONER (BY SMT. SHRAVANI P.T, ADVOCATE FOR SRI RAHUL S REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI NAGARAJAIAH, S/O HANUMANTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT ANUPANAHALLI VILLAGE, Digitally signed UDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, by NANDINI M TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 140.

S Location: H IGH COURT OF 2. LAKSHMINARASAMMA, KARNATAKA W/O LATE OBALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT ANUPANAHALLI VILLAGE, URDIGERE HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 140.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B K MANJUNATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;

R-2 SERVED- UNREPRESENTED)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.6.2018 IN M.A.NO.3/2018 PASSED BY FIRST APPELLATE COURT ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT TUMAKURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

ORAL ORDER

1. Plaintiff is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to set- aside the order dated 22.06.2018 passed in MA No.3/2018 by the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru vide Annexure-A.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Suit in OS No.163/2017 is filed by the petitioner herein before the jurisdictional Civil Court at Tumakuru, seeking the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful using of water from the schedule joint well to feed the water to plaintiff's garden land in any manner. The contesting defendants had opposed the suit claim by filing written statement. An application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Rule 2 of CPC was filed in OS No.163/2017 on behalf of the petitioner seeking an order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants or their men from interfering with the plaintiff’s peaceful using of water from the schedule joint well situated in the suit schedule property for the purpose of irrigating his agricultural land. The prayer made in the application was opposed by contesting defendants. The Trial Court vide its order dated 04.01.2018 had allowed the application filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Rule 2 of CPC, which was questioned by defendant No.2 in MA No.3/2018 before the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru. The Appellate Court vide the order impugned has allowed MA No.3/2018 and the order passed by the Trial Court on the application filed by the plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Rule 2 of CPC was set-aside. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner having reiterated the grounds urged in the petition submits that petitioner has no other water source to irrigate his property. For the last seven years, alternative arrangement by incurring huge expenses is being made by the petitioner to irrigate his property. The suit is at the stage of cross-examination of PW2 and if the Trial Court is directed to dispose off the suit expeditiously without being influenced by the observations made while disposing of MA No.3/2018, the same would secure the ends of justice.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the contesting respondent fairly submits that he has no objection for disposing off the petition with the aforesaid observations.

6. The submissions made on both sides is placed on record.

7. This writ petition is disposed off with a request to the Trial Court to expedite trial in OS No.163/2017 and dispose off the suit on merits, without being influenced by the observations made in the order impugned, as expeditio