- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33084-DB WA No. 1298 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K WRIT APPEAL NO. 1298 OF 2023 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: SMT. B.S. SULOCHANAMMA WIFE OF SRI CHANDRAKANTH B. MANTRI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT No.1475, 4TH CROSS, BANGALORE CITY CORPORATION COLONY, GOVINDARAJANAGAR, WEST OF THIMMENAHALLI MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU-560 040 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA PRASAD T.V., ADVOCATE-(ABSENT)) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. SQUARE, Digitally signed by CHANNEGOWDA PREMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33084-DB WA No. 1298 of 2023 BENGALURU - 560 002 3. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (WEST) BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, MALLESHWARAM, BENGALURU- 560 003. 4. ASST. REVENUE OFFICER GOVINDARAJA NAGAR SUB-DIVISION, 1ST FLOOR DR. AMBEDKAR GROUND 60 FEET ROAD, AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU-560079 5. M.R. JAGADISH RAJU S/O LATE SMT. B.H. JAYAMMA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT 738. 2ND STAGE, E BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.N. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1; SRI. S.N. PRASHANTH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 - R4; SRI. H.P. LEELADHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO (i) SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SINGLE JUDGE VIDE ORDER DATED 11.01.2023 PASSED IN WP No.14990/2014 AND ETC. THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33084-DB WA No. 1298 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN) Learned counsel for the appellant is absent today. We notice that on the last date also, when the matter was called, there is no appearance for the appellant. 2. The writ petition had been disposed of rejecting the prayer sought for with liberty to the petitioner to avail appropriate civil remedy. It is submitted that respondent No.5 is in possession of the property in question at present. 3. In the above view of the matter, this appeal is disposed of leaving open the contentions of the appellant. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17