- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 32348 OF 2024 (GM-KEB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI K.B.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, S/O SRI BYREDDY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 2. SMT. VEENA B.V., W/O SRI K.B.RAMAKRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.14, 2ND CROSS, JAI BHEEMANAGAR, OLD MADIWALA, BTM 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 068. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI VIVEKANANDA H S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 3RD FLOOR, COMPANY OFFICE, KRISHNA RAJENDRA CIRCLE, BANGALORE - 560 001, REP BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER. 2. BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED, CHANDAPURA DIVISION, NO.204, PARK ROAD, 1ST STAGE, SURYA NAGAR, CHANDAPURA, Digitally signed by GEETHAKUMARI PARLATTAYA S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 BANGALORE - 560 081 REP BY ITS ASSISTANT EXEXUTIVE ENGINEER. 3. MR. T.NARAYANA, S/O LATE SRI THAMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, SHANUBHOGHANA HALLI, BANNERUGHATTA POST, BANGALORE - 560 083. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PADMA S UTTUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI M.N. NAREN SHAKTI SWARUP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI M.N. UMASHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1 AND 2 TO IMPLEMENT / EXECUTE THE ORDER DTD. 19.09.2024 VIDE ANNX-N BY RESTORING AND REINSTATING THE POWER CONNECTION IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS AND REMOVE THE ILLEGAL CONNECTION WRONGFULLY STANDING IN THE NAME OF R-3. IN THE EVENT THE R-1 AND 2 ARE UNABLE TO IMPLEMENT, A SUITABLE DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS TO BE ISSUED TO THE JURISDICTIONAL POLICE TO AID AND ASSIST THE R-1 AND 2 IN IMPLEMENTATION AND TO ENSURE LAW AND ORDER IS PROTECTED. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ON B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 ORAL ORDER Writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus directing respondents no.1 and 2 to implement/execute order dated 19.09.2024 at Annexure-N by restoring and reinstating power connection to petitioners building standing in name of respondent no.3. 2. Sri HS Vivekananda, learned counsel for petitioners submitted, petitioners would not press prayer insofar as removal of connection given to respondent no.3 for present. 3. It was submitted, petitioners were agreement of sale holders in respect of 9 Acres in Sy.no.16 of Kannanayakana Agrahara village, Kulumepalya Dhakale, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Talk, Bengaluru District, originally belonging to KK Sheriff. As there were dispute between petitioners and his vendors OS nos.522, 523 and 524/2012 respectively were filed for specific performance of agreement of sale. Said suits ended in compromise decree on 07.04.2018, 15.03.2014 and 03.03.2014 respectively. As per compromise, sale deeds came to be executed in favour of petitioners. Thus, petitioners were owners of 9 Acres of land in Sy.no.16. Thereafter petitioners had approached jurisdictional Panchayat Development Authority - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 and obtained general licence for carrying on poultry farm. For said purpose they needed 10HP power supply, they approached respondents no.1 and 2. Petitioners constructed four go- down/shop with concrete blocks. 4. In meanwhile, petitioners had executed agreement of sale in favour of respondent no.3 to extent of 2 Acres out of 9 Acres on 01.07.2020. Remaining 7 Acres was in possession and occupation of petitioners and they had put up construction. And when respondent no.3 encroached upon petitioners portion of land, they had filed OS no.317/2023 before Prl. Civil Jude & JMFC., Anekal, and obtained an order of interim injunction protecting their possession. Said suit was pending. When respondent no.3 violated order of interim injunction and demolished structures, they have filed application under Order XXXIX rule 2(a) of CPC for suitable action against respondent no.3. Even said application was also presently pending. It was submitted, on petitioners filing application for sanction of power supply, respondents no.1 and 2 had obtained legal opinion and thereafter approached for sanction of power supply in pursuance of direction dated 19.09.2024 at Annexure - N. It was submitted, when petitioners approached respondents for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 restoration of power supply, respondents no.1 and 2 had failed to respond, constraining petitioners to approach this Court. On said ground sought for allowing writ petition. 5. Smt.Padma S Uttur, learned counsel for respondents no.1 and 2 and Sri MN Naren Shakti Swamy, learned counsel for Sri MN Umashankar, learned advocate for respondent no.3 sought to oppose writ petition. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 submitted, on instructions, inspection of premises/land belonging to petitioners, wherein it was found that structures were completely demolished and on said ground expressed inability to restore power supply. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submitted there would be no objection for petitioner availing power supply to his extent of 7 Acres of land in Sy.no.16. 6. Learned counsel for respondent no.3 submitted, there was no dispute about petitioners having executed agreement of sale in favour of respondent no.3 to extent of 2 Acres. It was submitted, respondent no.3 would have no objection for petitioners obtaining power supply in respect of 7 Acres of land or premises thereon, but petitioners would not be - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 justified in seeking for disconnection of power supply insofar as premises/land belonging to respondent no.3. 7. It was alternatively submitted since earlier installation i.e. meters were alleged to have been lost, in case petitioners files application for fresh sanction, same would be in accordance with law and orders passed thereon subject to consumption charges. 8. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition record. 9. From above, since petitioners are seeking only writ of mandamus directing respondents to restore power supply to petitioners' premises. Though, learned counsel for respondent submitted, petitioners premises/building, wherein power supply was granted earlier is demolished, same would not come in way of respondents restoring power supply, on petitioner submitting material to identify his extent of 7 Acres in Sy.no.16 of Kannanayakana Agrahara Village, Kulumepalya Dhakle, Jigani Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District, especially, as respondent no.3 submits that he would have no objection for - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32962 WP No. 32348 of 2024 petitioners getting power supply insofar as 7 acres of land are concerned. 10. In view of above, writ petition is disposed of. Petitioners to submit records which would enable clear demarcation or identify his 7 Acres of land in Sy.no.16 within two weeks from today. On receipt of same, respondents to restore power supply at place as indicated by petitioners. In case earlier meters are not available, respondents to consider petitioners' application for fresh connection in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon within two weeks, subject to petitioner paying necessary charges for same. Needless to observe above arrangement would be subject to final outcome in pending suits. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE Psg* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43