- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48250-DB WP No. 9737 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU WRIT PETITION NO. 9737 OF 2024 (GM-CON) BETWEEN: 1. UMESH BAJAJ S/O BHIMSEN BAJAJ, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, 2. NEETA BAJAJ W/O UMESH BAJAJ, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, BOTH RESIDING AT PREMISES NO J-05 DIAMOND DISTRICT, AIRPORT ROAD, BANGALORE 560008 SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. LATHA S SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S ADARSH DEVELOPERS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ESTABLISHED UNDER THE INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT 1932, OFFICE AT #10, VITTAL MALLYA ROAD, BANGALORE 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER MR B M JAYASHANKAR ALSO AT 2/4, LONGFORD GARDENS, Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48250-DB WP No. 9737 of 2024 RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU 560025 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. V B SHIVA KUMAR., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS WHICH CAUSED IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18.12.2023 MADE IN APPEAL No. 2345/2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present writ petition has been filed impugning the order dated 18.12.2023 passed in Appeal No.2345/2023 by the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission., Bengaluru (Principal Bench) against the order dated 27.11.2023 passed in EA/158/2009 arising out order dated 05.04.2005 passed in CC/510/2004 by the IV Additional District Commission, Bengaluru. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48250-DB WP No. 9737 of 2024 2. The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, vide impugned order dated 18.12.2023 directed the appellant/ developers to pay 20% of the amount and complainant to pay 80% of the amount, out of construction cost estimated as on the date of commencement of construction of Villa. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that in the execution proceedings of the order passed by the District Commission, the State Commission on appeal, has modified the said order. Learned counsel further submits that the said order passed by the State Commission is without jurisdiction. 4. The District Commission has allowed the complaint in terms of the order dated 05.04.2005 passed in CC/510/2004. The said order was affirmed up to the Supreme Court. The complainants despite having an order from the District Commission way back in the year 2005 are still struggling to enforce the order. In the appeal against an order passed in execution, the State Commission could not have modified the order dated 05.04.2005 passed in CC/510/2004 by the District Commission. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48250-DB WP No. 9737 of 2024 5. We are therefore, of the view that the impugned order dated 18.12.2023 is wholly without jurisdiction and therefore, we set aside the said order. 6. Accordingly, we allow the writ petition and quash the impugned order dated 18.12.2023 passed by the State Commission. No order as to costs. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34