2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 439319
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
MR SREEJITH PURUSHOTHAMAN – Appellant
Versus
SRI B L KODANDA RAMAIAH – Respondent
WP 16804/2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
WRIT PETITION NO. 16804 OF 2025 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. MR. SREEJITH PURUSHOTHAMAN
S/O. PURUSHOTHAMAN KANI SHREYAS
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
2. MRS. RANJIBA PARAMMAL
W/O SREEJITH PURUSHOTHAMAN
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
BOTH R/A NO. 14165, PRESTIGE TRANQUILITY,
BUDIGERE ROAD, BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE,
BENGALURU - 560 049.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. ABDUL RAZAAQ A, ADVOCATE FOR
Digitally signed SRI. K.N.DAYALU, ADVOCATE)
by
SHARADAVANI
B
AND:
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka
1. SRI. B.L. KODANDA RAMAIAH
S/O. SRI. B. C. LAKSHMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. .SMT. KALAVATHI R
W/O SRI. B. L. KODANDA RAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
3. SRI. CHAITHANYA
S/O SRI. B. L. KODANDA RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R1 TO R3 RESIDING AT NO.14, SENA VIHAR, KAMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 043.
4. SRI. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @B.L. ANAND KUMAR.
S/O. SRI. B. C. LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
5. SMT. SUJATHA G W/O SRI. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @ B.L. ANAND KUMAR.
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
6. MASTER ADITHYA NANDAN S/O. SRI. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @ B.L. ANAND KUMAR AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS.
(SINCE DEFENDANT NO. 6 IS MINOR, HE IS DULY REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL AND NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER MR. SWAMI VEET SANDESH @ BL ANAND KUMAR)
R4 TO R6 RESIDING AT NO.831, 2ND FLOOR, 26TH MAIN, 10TH CROSS, HSR LAYOUT, I SECTOR, BENGALURU - 560 102.
7. SRI. B.L. GIRISH KUMAR S/O. SRI. B. C. LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
8. SMT. KOMALAKSHI B.N. W/O SRI. B.L. GIRISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 9. MASTER B.G. TEJAS S/O. SRI. B. L. GIRISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, 10. MASTER B.G. MOHITH S/O. SRI. B. L. GIRISH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS (SINCE DEFEDANTS NO.9 AND 10 ARE MINOR THEY ARE DULY REPRESENTED BY THEIR LEGAL AND NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER SRI. B. L. GIRISH KUMAR)
R7 TO R10 ARE RESIDING AT NO. 008, SHANTI 3, SAI GARDENS, SEEGEHALLI BENGALURU - 560 067.
11. KEYA HOMES PVT. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI DINESH KEJRIWAL NO. 17. REGENT COURT, GROUND FLOOR. 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA 4TH BLOCK BENGALURU - 560 034 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R11)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 28.05.2025 ISSUING EMERGENT NOTICE IN O.S. NO.155/2025 IA NO.2 ON THE FILE OF THE VACATION JUDGE, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE AT ANNEXURE-Y AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL ORDER
This petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:
"a. Issue a writ or writs in the nature of Certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing the order dated 28.05.2025 issuing emergent notice in O.S. No.155/2025 on I.A.No.2 on the file of the Vacation judge, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore at Annexure-Y.
b. Issue a writ or writs in the nature of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents/Defendants in O.S. No. 155/2025 on the file of the Vacation judge. Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, not to alienate, encumber, or create any third-party interest in respect of the suit schedule property, pending disposal of I.A. No.2 filed for grant of temporary injunction in the said suit;
c. In the alternative, direct the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the suit schedule property, pending consideration and final disposal of I.A. No.2;
d. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed a suit for specific performance and along with the suit, he has filed an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short 'CPC') for interim relief, which has not been considered by the trial Court, which compelled the petitioners to knock the doors of this Court and this Court granted an ex parte interim order.
3. It is submitted tha