PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N v. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12388-DB WA No. 1426 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1426 OF 2024 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
Legal Reasoning
1. SRI P RAJU POOJARI S/O PONNA POOJARI AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS R/AT NO.9/4, 5TH MAIN WARD NO.96, RAMACHANDRAPURA OLD OKALIPURA BENGALURU-560 021 (BY SRI T PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE BENGALURU-560 002 2. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR LAND RECORDS DIVISION -1, K R CIRCLE BENGALURU- 560 001 …APPELLANT - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12388-DB WA No. 1426 of 2024 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE GANDHINAGAR TMC ROYAN ROAD BENGALURU- 560 009 4. THE TAHSILDAR BENGALURU NORTH TALUK KANDAYA BHAVANA K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU–560 009 5. THE ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (BMTF) BBMP MAIN BUILDING 1ST FLOOR, N.R. ROAD BENGALURU -560 002 6. M/S NAVAKAR BUILDERS REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM REP BY SRI SUSHIL KUMAR AND SRI NOORULLA HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.22/1 MADARSAB LANE, COTTON PET, BENGALURU-560 053 (BY SRI N.R. JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 & 3 SRI K.S. HARISH, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2, 4 & 5) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 12.08.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION No.15152/2021 (LB-BMP) AND BE PLEASED TO ALLOW
Decision
THE WRIT PETITION No.15152/2021 (LB-BMP) AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS DEEMED NECESSARY IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12388-DB WA No. 1426 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N.V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I. ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA) Heard learned Advocate Mr. T.Prakash for the appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate Mr. K.S.Harish for respondent Nos.2, 4 and 5 and learned Advocate Mr. N.R. Jagadeshwara for respondent Nos.1 and 3. 2. Appellant is the original petitioner, who, by preferring the present appeal, has called in question judgment and order of learned Single Judge dated 12th August 2024 whereby the petition came to be dismissed. 2.1 What was prayed by the petitioner before learned Single Judge was to direct respondent authorities to take action to demolish the construction on the land which was alleged to be encroached. A direction was asked for against private respondent No.6 not to sell - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12388-DB WA No. 1426 of 2024 the property under the encroachment is removed. There was a yet another prayer requiring the respondents to recover the damages caused to the Government property and initiate the action in law. 3. The facts as emerge from the record are that respondent No.6 happens to be land developer who purchased the property situated adjacent to the property of the petitioner and that there was a common road passing between both the properties which road further was connecting the government land. 3.1 It was the case of the petitioner that taking unadvantage of adjoining government property, respondent No.6-developer started construction of building which, according to the petitioner, obstructed the public road as fencing with sheets was erected. 3.2 The aspects which were noticeable were inter alia that the petitioner had filed suit in original suit No.4572 of 2017 for relief of permanent injunction and also filed was the application for interim injunction, against respondent No.6 and that the said interlocutory application stood rejected on 21st November 2017, to which there was no further challenge. In the same way, respondent No.6 had also instituted original suit No.7501 of 2018 against the petitioner and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12388-DB WA No. 1426 of 2024 the injunction application of respondent No.6 in the said suit was allowed. Though appeal is pending, no interim order has been granted, it is recorded by learned Single Judge. 4. Learned Single Judge noticing the facts and the pendency of the suits including the subsequent suit filed by respondent No.6, reasoned as under, extracting from paragraph 15, in an from interfering “Thereafter, respondent No.6 filed a suit in O.S. No.7501/2018 the relief of a for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner the peaceful herein possession and enjoyment. In the said suit, the respondent No.6 interlocutory filed application seeking an order of temporary injunction. The said application was allowed vide order dated 19.02.2019. The petitioner aggrieved by the order preferred an appeal in for MFA No.7726/2019. respondent No.6 submits that the said appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. It is the case of the petitioner that there exists a road between the property of the petitioner and respondent No.6. The said fact is denied by respondent No.6. There is a dispute in regard to the existence of road.” Learned counsel 4.1 In the same paragraph, learned Single Judge stated, “Hence, the writ petition involves disputed questions of fact and further, there is also a suit pending between the parties before the Civil Court. In view of the same, as the suits are pending before the Civil Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:12388-DB WA No. 1426 of 2024 petitioner has not made out any ground to entertain the writ petition.” 5. Thus, it is evident that in relation to the subject matter, which is brought under the writ jurisdiction, both the sides have been agitating their rights by instituting the respective suits. Respondent NO.6 has been enjoying interim order also. This stands as a good ground not to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction. The subject matter controversy also involved disputed questions of facts as rightly observed by learned Single Judge. 6. No error can be booked in the judgment and order of learned Single Judge. 7. The appeal is meritless and stands dismissed. SD/- (N.V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE SD/- (M.I. ARUN) JUDGE VMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19