- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18935 WP No. 8625 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 8625 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. M/S DIVYA CONSTRUCTIONS 309 NO.9, M S RAMAIAH ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BENGALURU - 560 022 … PETITIONER (BY SMT. PRIYA V.B. SHETTER, ADVOCATE FOR SRI A. MAHESH CHOWDHARY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK KANDHYA BHAVANA K G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 009 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KANDHAYA BHAVAN BANGALORE - 560 001 3. PRADEEP KUMAR S/O LATE S. BASAVARAJU AGED 46 YEARS NO.403, RENAISSANCE WOODS JB KAVAL SY.NO.43, NEW NO.43, Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18935 WP No. 8625 of 2022 YELAHANKA HOBLI BENGALURU - 560 015 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT NO.6, BUILDING NO.162, THIRD FLOOR RENAISSANCE WOODS APT COMPLEX J B KAVAL, BANGALORE - 560 015. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA FOR R1 & R2; SRI RAVINDRA P., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED COMMUNICATIONS IMPUGNED COMMUNICATION VIDE ANNEXURE-A DTD 22.03.2022 SEEKING TO CONFISCATE THE PROPERTIES BELONGING TO PETITIONER IS WITHOUT ANY AUTHORITY AND HENCE ILLEGAL AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER It is the case of the petitioner that it is a registered partnership firm. Copy of the deed is produced at Annexure-B. The attachment notice at Annexure-A has been issued by the Special Tahsildar seeking to execute the order passed by the RERA court in Case No.626/2018- 19. It is submitted that the said proceedings under the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18935 WP No. 8625 of 2022 RERA Act are against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. and the order passed against such entity cannot be enforced against the petitioner which is a different legal entity. It is further contended that even if some of the partners of the petitioner - Firm are Directors of Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd., the proceedings must be limited to the said company and cannot be proceeded against the petitioner. 2. Noticed the order at Annexure-J. An order is passed against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. The notice of attachment of properties by the Revenue Authorities is against the properties which the petitioner asserts are the properties of the petitioner - Partnership Firm. The said assertion is not controverted. Needless to state the order passed against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. cannot be enforced against the different legal entity i.e., petitioner - Firm. 3. Accordingly, the notice at Annexure-A is set aside as it seeks to enforce the order of RERA against the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18935 WP No. 8625 of 2022 petitioner herein. It is made clear that the notice at Annexure-A relating to Flat Nos. 307, 309, 402, 403 and 404 in "Divya Land Mark Apartments" stand in the name of the petitioner as is evidenced from the memo dated 04.06.2025 produced along with the list of documents. 4. It is made clear that the order passed by the authority under RERA must be construed to be limited to enforcement against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. and will not have the effect of permitting proceedings to be continued against petitioner. For the purpose of clarity, it is to be observed that the notice seeking to enforce the proceedings under RERA could continue against Divya Infra Properties Pvt. Ltd. and the assets of the said company as is permissible under law. The present adjudication is limited only to the petitioner herein and must not be construed otherwise. Needless to state any proceedings under RERA with respect to the case No.626/2018-19 cannot be enforced against the petitioner herein. All rights of the 3rd respondent are reserved to be - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18935 WP No. 8625 of 2022 enforced against the respondent in the RERA case. All contentions of 3rd respondent as against respondent in RERA case are kept open. Needless to state the rights of the 3rd respondent to initiate appropriate proceedings are kept open as is permissible in law. 5. Accordingly, petition is disposed off. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP