2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 14034
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
TARA VITASTA GANJU
GALAMMA – Appellant
Versus
GALI HANUMANTHAPPA – Respondent
WP 2496/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 2496 OF 2026 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
1. GALAMMA D/O LATE GALI HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 098.
2. ANJINAPPA S/O LATE GALI HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.167, PATTANGERE VILLAGE, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 098. 3. SMT. MAHESHWARI D/O LATE GALI HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.167, PATTANGERE VILLAGE, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 098.
4. NARAYANA G S/O LATE GALI HANUMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT NO.167, PATTANGERE VILLAGE, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 098.
…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHARATH S. GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. GALI HANUMANTHAPPA S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.110/A, 4TH CROSS, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, PATTANAGERE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH, BENGALURU - 560 098.
2. SMT. GALAMMA D/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT PATTANGERE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 098.
3. ANJAN MURTHY S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.167, NEAR MARAMMA TEMPLE, PATTANGERE, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR, BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK, BANGALORE - 560 098.
4. BASAPPA S/O LATE SIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 98 YEARS, R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU - 560 098.
5. SUSHEELAMMA W/O RAMAPPA, AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS, R/AT THEERTHAHALLI VILLAGE, SHIVAMOGGA - 577 432.
6. K.T INDIRA W/O LATE K.M THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS, R/AT NO.M7, SCHOOL ROAD, SOMAVARPET, COORG - 571 236.
7. K.T SANATH S/O LATE K.M THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.M7, SCHOOL ROAD, SOMAVARPET, COORG - 571 236. 8. M/S M SQUARE PROPERTIES REP. BY ITS SOLE PROPRIETOR, MR.NARESH KUMAR, S/O LATE HEERACHAND, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT NO.62, 63, 88 AND 89, HOSAKEREHALLI, BSK III STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 085.
9. M/S ELEGANT ALTIMA A PARTNERSHIP FIRM, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.11/13, GUBALAHALA VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 061 REP. BY ITS PARTNERS REGD. UNDER PARTNERSHIP ACT
10. SRI. S.N MANJUNATH S/O SRI. M. SUBRAMANI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT NO.1/116, NEW KEMPEGOWDA LAYOUT, BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 085.
11. SRI. S. RAJESH S/O SRI. M. SUBRAMANI, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.1/116, NEW KEMPEGOWDA LAYOUT, BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 085.
12. SRI. S. JAYANTH S/O SRI. M. SUBRAMANI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.1/116, NEW KEMPEGOWDA LAYOUT, BSK 3RD STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 085.
13. SRI. S. CHANDRAPRAKASH S/O LATE MUNASWAMY NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/AT NO.767, SREENIKETHAN, 7TH MAIN, 3RD CROSS, KSRTC LAYOUT, J.P NAGAR, 2ND PHASE, BENGALURU - 560 075.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.V. SUDHAKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R9 TO R13;
R1 TO R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE XXXV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH 36) TO PASS ORDERS FORTHWITH ON IA NO. 1 AND 2 FILED UNDER ORDER XXXIX RULE 1 AND 2 SEEKING FOR TEMPORTY INJUNCTION O.S. NO. 4497/2024, VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND J1., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition seeks to challenge an order passed on I.A.Nos.1 and 2 filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in O.S.No.4497/2024 by the learned XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-36) [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”].
2. The prayers in the present petition read as follows:
a) Issue writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the XXXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-36) to pass orders forthwith on I.A.No.1 and 2 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 and 2 seeking for temporary injunction in O.S.No.4497/2024, vide Annexure – J & J1.
b) Grant such other relief that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the matter.
3. This