IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 25291 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

1. M R SRINIVAS S/O LATE MUNIRAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT BABAIAH TEMPLE STREET, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU 560 064

2. M R ANIL KUMAR AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIRAJAPPA R/AT NO. 121, TULASI NILAYA, MARUTHI NAGAR, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU - 560 064 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANDEEP LAHIRI.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed SQUADRON DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED by GAVRIBIDAN UR A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE SUBRAMANYA COMPANIES ACT, 1956 GUPTA SREENATH HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR, Location: HIGH EMBASSY POINT, NO.150, INFANTRY ROAD, COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE …RESPONDENT THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE ORDER DATED 05/08/2025 (ANNX-A) PASSED BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE IN OS NO. 888/2025. SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 05/08/2025 PASSED ON THE APPLICATION IN IA NO. 1 AND 2 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULES 1 AND 2 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN OS NO. 888/2025 BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE (ANN-A), AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE APPLICATIONS IN IA NO. 1 AND 2 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULES 1 AND 2 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN OS NO. 888/2025 BY THE I ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE (ANNX-W AND W1).

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The notice is yet to be served to the respondent/defendant before the trial Court.

3. Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the plaintiff Nos.1 and 2 in OS.No.888/25 who are before this Court aggrieved by the non-passing of the orders on the application IA.No.2 filed under Order No. XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of CPC for grant of an injunction, whereas the trial Court passed an order by issuing suit summons on the application and on the main suit.

4. A suit came to be filed by the petitioners/plaintiffs for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, agents, workmen, officers, henchmen, representatives and assigns from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners/plaintiffs over the 'A' schedule property belonging to the petitioners/plaintiffs.

5. Along with the suit, plaintiffs filed two applications. One application IA.No.2 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and Rule 2 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking an order of temporary injunction restraining the respondent/defendant from interfering, obstructing. blocking, or interfering in any manner whatsoever with the plaintiffs' right of ingress and egress to the Schedule 'A' property through the pathway of 9 metres running over lands owned and possessed by defendants in the Schedule 'B' properties across Survey Nos. 46/1, 45/1, 45/2,44 and

43 as demarcated in the documents produced before the trial Court and also before this Court by way of photographs and a Google satellite image.

6. In the said application, plaintiffs also sought for an alternative relief which reads as under.

"Pass order of temporary injunction restraining Defendant its agents, workmen, officers, henchmen, representatives, assigns, and such other person claiming through or under them from Obstructing, blocking, or interfering in any manner whatsoever with the Plaintiffs' right of ingress and egress to the schedule A property through the pathway alongside the eastern perimeter of the Lake, i.e., along the western perimeter of the Lands in Sy. Nos. 45/2, 44 and 43 i.e., the schedule B1 to 83 properties owned and possessed by the Defendants; in the interest of justice and equity.

And grant such other and further relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case in the i