IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY WRIT PETITION NO. 31692 OF 2019 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SRI B.D. KULKARNI S/O D.B. KULKARNI AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS NO.150A, 29TH CROSS RAJAJINAGAR II BLOCK BENGALURU - 560 010 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT:

NO.15/A, 7TH CROSS I MAIN, PRASHANTH NAGAR HOUSING BOARD COLONY MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU - 560 079.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI VARAPRASAD K, ADV.)

AND:

SRI L. NARAYAN Digitally S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH NAIDU signed by AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS NANDINI M S Location: R/AT NO.14/A, IST FLOOR HIGH COUR T 4TH CROSS, MAGADI MAIN ROAD OF BANGALORE - 560 023 KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY HIS G.P.A. HOLDER SRI N VENKATESH S/O LATE A NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT NO.14/1A, IST FLOOR

4TH LEFT SIDE CROSS MAGADI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE - 560 023.

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI PRADEEP NAIK K, ADV.)

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 3.7.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED VII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, ON I.A.NO.1 FILED BY THE PETITONER U/S 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEFURE, IN MISC.PETITON NO.589/2010 VIDE ANNEXURE-M AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE SAID APPLICATION BY GRANTING THE RELIEF AS SOUGHT THEREIN.

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. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed with a prayer to set aside the order dated 03.07.2019 passed on I.A.No.I in Misc.No.589 of 2010 by the Court of VII Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Suit in O.S.No.6291 of 2007 was filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner seeking the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the suit schedule property. It appears that during the pendency of the said suit, there was an interim order operating against the defendant restraining him from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the plaintiff. It appears that O.S.No.

6291 of 2007 was decreed on 30.06.2010 and the appeal filed against the said judgment and decree by the defendant was dismissed. Misc. petition No.589 of 2010 was filed before the trial Court after the suit was decreed, alleging that, the interim order of temporary injunction was violated by the defendant. In the said proceedings, I.A.No.I was filed under Section 151 of CPC by the petitioner seeking to reject Misc. petition on the ground that the same is not maintainable. The trial Court vide the order impugned has rejected I.A.No.I and therefore petitioner is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that suit in O.S.No.6291 of 2007 was decreed on 30.06.2010. Misc. petition under Order XXXIX Rule 2A R/w Section 151 of CPC is subsequently filed on 31.07.2010, after disposal of the suit. The trial Court had become functus officio and therefore it could not have entertained a Misc.No.589 of 2010. Accordingly, he prays to allow the petition.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that during the pendency of the suit itself, an application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC was filed on behalf of the plaintiff. As on the day, the suit was decreed, the said application was pending, and no orders were passed on the said application. It is under these circumstances, separate proceedings in Misc.No.589 of 2010 has been filed on behalf of plaintiff in O.S.No.6291 of 2007. He submits that in the event this Court arrives at a conclusion that the present proceedings is not maintainable, the respondent herein may be granted liberty to reopen O.S.No.6291 of 2007 for the purpose of considering the application in I.A.No.IV, filed in O.S.No.6291 of

2007 under Order XXXIX Rule 2A R/w Section 151 of CPC. 6. It is not in dispute that the proceedings in Misc.No.589 of 2010 has been initiated under Order XXXIX Rule 2A R/