IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 33243 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)

BETWEEN:

SMT VASANTHA HARISH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS W/O. SRI HARISH K., R/AT HARI NIVAS, 6^TH CROSS VIVEKANANDA ROAD PENTACOSTAL CHURCH RAMAMURTHY NAGAR BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU 560 016 …PETITIONER (BY SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANIL KUMAR B S.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SRI B N CHANDRA SHEKHAR AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O. NARASIMHAIAH Digitally signed by NO. 136/1, SEEGEHALLI, GAVRIBIDANUR BENGALURU 560 049.

SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH 2. SRI. PRATHAP SINGH B Location: HIGH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, COURT OF R/AT 50, PRASHANTH LAYOUT KARNATAKA KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE KADUGODI POST BENGALURU EAST TALUK BENGALURU 560 067.

3. SRI. VIKAS PODILI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O. NAGARAJA NAIDU PODILI, R/AT 22-927/4B, VIJAYNAGAR MAIN-1 ESTATE, GUDUPALLE, CHITTOOR ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 001 … RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD 27.10.2025 PASSED BY THE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT K.R PURAM, BENGALURU RURAL, ON IA NO. 1 IN O.S NO. 3132/2025 AT ANNX-S BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT WP AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW IA NO. 1 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S NO. 3132/2025GRANT COSTS 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 the learned counsel - Sri H. Shantibhushan on behalf of learned counsel - Sri Anil Kumar B.S. for petitioner.

2. The present petition is filed by the petitioner/plaintiff being aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the trial Court, whereby the trial Court has refrained from granting any ad interim exparte order Temporary Injunction and has issued notice to the respondents/defendants on IA No.1 in O.S. No.

3132/2025.

3. Parties are referred to as per their ranking before the trial Court.

4. The petitioner/plaintiff filed the suit against the respondents/defendants for the relief of Permanent Injunction and other consequential reliefs. Along with the plaint, she filed an application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2 of CPC r/w Section 151 CPC for an ad interim order of temporary injunction restraining the defendants from interfering the plaintiff’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties. In view of urgency involved in the matter, plaintiff sought for an exparte order of temporary injunction prior to issuance of notice to the defendants.

5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner/plaintiff that plaintiff is the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule properties, having purchased the same by way of registered sale deeds. The plaintiff got into an agreement of sale with the confirming parties and the defendants with regard to the suit schedule properties. The plaintiff also executed a registered general power of attorney dated 30.10.2024 in favour of the respondents/defendants. Pursuant to the power of attorney, respondents were authorized to perform certain acts on behalf of the petitioner concerning the suit schedule properties. A condition was imposed in the general power of attorney to become effective on payment of consideration amount in the agreement of sale. The payment of the sale consideration was stipulated under the agreement of sale.

5.1 It is further contended that in terms of the agreement of sale and the general power of attorney, the defendants handed over 15 post-dated cheques towards a portion of the sale consideration amounting to Rs.7,50,00,000/- (Rupees seven crores fifty lakhs only), a portion of it was to the share of the plaintiff. The plaintiff presented the cheques to the banker for collection. The same came to be dishonoured along with other cheques which were given to the confirming parties.

5.2 It is contended by learned counsel for the plaintiff that the agreement of sale as well as the power of attorney dated 30.10