Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13982 (KAR)

RAJAGOPAL REDDY v. SHRI.M DALICHAND

WA/86/2025 · 2025-06-12

C M Joshi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20203-DB WA No. 86 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR V KAMESWAR RAO, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. RAJAGOPAL REDDY, S/O LATE SRI E SHANKARAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/AT NO. 3, SRI E SHANKARAPPA REDDY GARDEN, BESIDES TATA SHERWOOD APARTMENTS, BASAVANAGARA, MARATHAHALLI POST, BANGALORE-560 037. 2. SRI S NAGARAJA REDDY, S/O LATE E SHANKARAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, R/AT NO. 3, LAKSHMI NILAYA, 5TH CROSS, VEERABHADRANAGAR, 1ST STAGE, MARATHHALLI POST, BANGALORE-560 037. 3. SRI S CHANDRASHEKAR REDDY, S/O LATE SRI E SHANKARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO. 3, SRI E SHANKARAPPA REDDY GARDEN, BESIDES TATA SHERWOOD APARTMENTS, BASAVANAGARA, MARATHAHALLI POST, BANGALORE-560 037. Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20203-DB WA No. 86 of 2025 4. SHRI S VIJAYARAGHAVA REDDY, S/O LATE SRI E SHANKARAPPA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NO. 153, JAYASHANAKARA DREAMS MEADOWS, KUNDAHALLI POST, BEHIND RAYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL, BANGALORE-560 037. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI VATSA, SENIOR COUNSEL ALONG WITH SRI UDITA RAMESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI M DALICHAND, S/O LATE SRI J MITHALAL JAIN, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO. 45/4, CASTLE STREET, ASHOK NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 025. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, KANDHAYA BHAVAN, BANGALORE-560 009. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, K.R PURAM, BANGALORE-560 036. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SAMMITH S, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI HARISH K.S, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & 3) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO. 3898 OF 2024 ORDER DATED 05.07.2024 TO THE EXTENT IT PRECLUDES THE APPELLANT FROM FILING OBJECTIONS, OR THEIR SIDE OF THE STORY NOT BEING HEARD BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20203-DB WA No. 86 of 2025 THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR V KAMESWAR RAO, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR V KAMESWAR RAO, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) This appeal arises from two orders passed by the learned Single Judge. The first one being the order in the Writ Petition No.3898/2024 decided on 05.07.2024. The second one being the order dated 14.10.2024 in the Review Petition No.368/2024 filed by the appellants herein seeking review of the order dated 05.07.2024. 2. The submission of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants is by drawing our attention to pages 715 and 716, whereby the learned Single Judge has rejected the plea made by the appellants, who were the Review Petitioners, that their plea be considered when the authority decide the representation made by respondent No.1. This according to the learned Senior Counsel for the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20203-DB WA No. 86 of 2025 appellants is totally untenable in law. Learned Senior Counsel do concede to the fact that in the subsequent developments which have taken place, the Deputy Commissioner has issued notice to the appellants herein on the representation made by respondent No.1 and to which, we have been informed, the appellants have also filed their objections. If that be so, it goes without saying that the appellants are required to be heard by the Deputy Commissioner while deciding the representation filed by respondent No.1. In fact, this is also the understanding of the counsel for the parties. 3. In view of the above, the learned counsel for the parties state that the appeal be disposed of. 4. At this stage, the learned counsel for the parties make a request for a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to dispose of the representation at the earliest. The liberty shall be with the parties to make such a request to the Deputy Commissioner. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:20203-DB WA No. 86 of 2025 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. 6. In view of the disposal of the appeal, all the pending IAs are also disposed of. Sd/- (V KAMESWAR RAO) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE tsn* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 54