{"id":390779,"date":"2026-07-18T16:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-18T10:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=390779"},"modified":"2026-07-18T16:37:49","modified_gmt":"2026-07-18T11:07:49","slug":"kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/","title":{"rendered":"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Disclaimer:<\/span> This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Karnataka High Court<\/span>: In a writ petition, filed under Article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574971\" target=\"_blank\">227<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\">Constitution<\/a>, challenging the order passed by the trial court which declined to grant an ex parte interim injunction and instead directed for emergent notice to be issued by way of summons, a Single Judge Bench of <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Tara Vitasta Ganju, J.<\/span>, held that the petition was not maintainable in view of the available statutory appellate remedy and accordingly disposed of the writ petition.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Facts<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In the present case, the petitioner sought an immediate ex parte interim injunction which the trial court declined and instead issued an emergent notice by way of summons. During the pendency of proceedings, the High Court granted an interim stay restraining the respondents from alienating or creating third-party rights in the subject property until the next date of hearing. <\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Registry reported that respondents had refused service. Consequently, they were deemed to have been served. <\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the High Court contending that the said order was arbitrary and illegal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Issue and Analysis<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Considering the preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition under Article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574971\" target=\"_blank\">227<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\">Constitution<\/a>, the Court stated that the same was settled in <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">A. Venkatasubbiah Naidu<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">S. Chellappan<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0000029219\" target=\"_blank\">(2000) 7 SCC 695<\/a> which clarified that &#8220;<span style=\"font-style: italic;\">power to grant an ex parte injunction is derived from Order <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001523435\" target=\"_blank\">39 Rule 1<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726944\" target=\"_blank\">CPC<\/a>, since Order <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001523507\" target=\"_blank\">43 Rule 1(r)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726944\" target=\"_blank\">CPC<\/a> makes an order under this rule appealable, the choice of remedy which lies with the parties is that they can either move the trial court to vacate the order under Order 39 Rule 4 or file an appeal under Order <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001523507\" target=\"_blank\">43 Rule 1(r)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726944\" target=\"_blank\">CPC<\/a><\/span>&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Further, relying on <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Virudhunagar Hindu Nadargal Dharma Paribalana Sabai<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Tuticorin Educational Society<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000312894\" target=\"_blank\">(2019) 9 SCC 538<\/a> and <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Mohd. Ali<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">V. Jaya<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9001338421\" target=\"_blank\">(2022) 10 SCC 477<\/a>, the Court stated that held that a petition under Article 227 is not maintainable where an effective statutory remedy is available.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court stated that instead of availing the statutory remedy available to him, the petitioner chose to file a petition under Article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574971\" target=\"_blank\">227<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\">Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Decision<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Considering that the petitioner&#8217;s application under Order <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001523435\" target=\"_blank\">39 Rules 1<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001523437\" target=\"_blank\">2<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726944\" target=\"_blank\">CPC<\/a> was still pending final adjudication, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the trial court to finally adjudicate the application within this period.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Further, the Court ordered the interim stay ordered during the pendency to be further valid for an extended period of 4 weeks.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\"><span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Bharath Kumar<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Munivenkatappa<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9003465114\" target=\"_blank\">2026 SCC OnLine Kar 3003<\/a>, decided on 7-1-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Petitioner:<\/span> A. Mahesh Chowdhary, Advocate<\/p>\n<h3 style=\"color: #000080;\">Buy Constitution of India &nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.ebcwebstore.com\/product\/the-constitution-of-india-coat-pocket-edition?products_id=100647\" target=\"_blank\">HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.ebcwebstore.com\/product\/the-constitution-of-india-coat-pocket-edition?products_id=100647\" target=\"_blank\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/s3.amazonaws.com\/ebcwebstore\/images\/the-constitution-of-india-coat-pocket-edition-Gopal-Sankaranarayanan-ebc-front-cover.JPG\" alt=\"Constitution of India\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" class=\"aligncenter size-large wp-image-294438\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">&#8220;&#8230;the petitioner, instead of availing the statutory remedy available to him, has chosen to file a petition under Article <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001574971\" target=\"_blank\">227<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726967\" target=\"_blank\">Constitution of India<\/a>.&#8221;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":390793,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[110211,14471,84043,3260,110210,68808,110215,110209,110212,110214,26684,110213],"class_list":["post-390779","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-alternative-statutory-remedy","tag-article-227","tag-article-227-constitution","tag-Constitution","tag-ex-parte-interim-injunction-appeal","tag-justice-tara-vitasta-ganju","tag-not-maintainable-writ-petition","tag-order-xliii-rule-1r-cpc","tag-order-xxxix-rules-1-and-2","tag-statutory-appellate-remedy","tag-supervisory-jurisdiction","tag-supervisory-jurisdiction-bar"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kar HC: Article 227 writ non-maintainable where CPC statutory remedy exists<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Karnataka High Court held that a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the refusal of an ex-parte interim injunction is not maintainable where an appeal under the CPC provides an effective statutory remedy.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Karnataka High Court held that a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the refusal of an ex-parte interim injunction is not maintainable where an appeal under the CPC provides an effective statutory remedy.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-18T10:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-07-18T11:07:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2560\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1705\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-18T10:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-18T11:07:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":459,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"alternative statutory remedy\",\"Article 227\",\"Article 227 Constitution\",\"Constitution\u00a0\",\"ex-parte interim injunction appeal\",\"Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju\",\"not maintainable writ petition\",\"Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC\",\"Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2\",\"statutory appellate remedy\",\"Supervisory jurisdiction\",\"supervisory jurisdiction bar\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kar HC: Article 227 writ non-maintainable where CPC statutory remedy exists\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-18T10:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-18T11:07:49+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"The Karnataka High Court held that a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the refusal of an ex-parte interim injunction is not maintainable where an appeal under the CPC provides an effective statutory remedy.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp\",\"width\":2560,\"height\":1705,\"caption\":\"Article 227 maintainability\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2026\\\/07\\\/18\\\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kar HC: Article 227 writ non-maintainable where CPC statutory remedy exists","description":"The Karnataka High Court held that a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the refusal of an ex-parte interim injunction is not maintainable where an appeal under the CPC provides an effective statutory remedy.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order","og_description":"The Karnataka High Court held that a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the refusal of an ex-parte interim injunction is not maintainable where an appeal under the CPC provides an effective statutory remedy.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-07-18T10:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-07-18T11:07:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2560,"height":1705,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order","datePublished":"2026-07-18T10:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-18T11:07:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/"},"wordCount":459,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp","keywords":["alternative statutory remedy","Article 227","Article 227 Constitution","Constitution\u00a0","ex-parte interim injunction appeal","Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju","not maintainable writ petition","Order XLIII Rule 1(r) CPC","Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2","statutory appellate remedy","Supervisory jurisdiction","supervisory jurisdiction bar"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/","name":"Kar HC: Article 227 writ non-maintainable where CPC statutory remedy exists","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp","datePublished":"2026-07-18T10:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-18T11:07:49+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"The Karnataka High Court held that a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the refusal of an ex-parte interim injunction is not maintainable where an appeal under the CPC provides an effective statutory remedy.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp","width":2560,"height":1705,"caption":"Article 227 maintainability"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/07\/18\/kar-hc-article-227-writ-non-maintainable-cpc-statutory-remedy-exists\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Read why Karnataka High Court refused to entertain Article 227 plea against ex parte injunction order"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Article-227-maintainability-scaled.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/390779","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=390779"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/390779\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":390795,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/390779\/revisions\/390795"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/390793"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=390779"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=390779"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=390779"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}