- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 16250 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: 1. M S RAGHU S/O M.SUBBA RAJU AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO. 61, AGS LAYOUT, NEW B.E.L ROAD, BENGALURU 560 094 …PETITIONER (BY SRI UDAY HOLLA, LEARNED SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI N KUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGLAURU 560 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 2. SMT. K.N.VANDANA W/O. P.V.GIRI, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.25, 2nd MAIN, 2nd CROSS, RMV 2nd STAGE, 3rd BLOCK, BENGALURU 560 094 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.VACHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI.PRITHVEESH.M.K., ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 NOT TO ALLOT THE ENCROACHED PORTION i.e., SCHEDULE B PROPERTY IN FAVOUR OF R2 TILL THE DISPOSAL OF O S NO.5524/2024 PENDING ON THE FILE OF XLII ADDL. CITY CIVIL JUDGE, BENGALURU CCH-43 BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 01.03.2025, 15.04.2025 AND 29.05.2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-R, S AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: "[a] issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 not to allot the encroached portion i.e., Schedule 'B' Property in favour of Respondent No.2 till the disposal of O.S.No.5524/2024 pending on the file of XLII Addl. City Civil Judge, Bengaluru, CCH-43 by considering the Representations dated 01.03.2025, 115.04.2025 & 29.05.2025, filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-R, S & T. and [b] grant such other relief/reliefs as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and in the circumstances of the case." 2. Heard learned Senior counsel Sri Uday Holla appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel Sri Prithveesh.M.K., appearing for respondent No.2 and learned counsel Sri B.Vachan appearing for respondent No.1. 3. The issue in the lis revolves around the allotment of the marginal land, which is said to be contiguous to the petitioner and respondent No.2. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 4. A little history to the claim of the possession of the petitioner is to be narrated, albeit of the periphery. The BDA is said to have allotted the land in favour of the mother of the vendor of the petitioner i.e., one Mary Jayashree on 23.02.2016, and a sale deed is executed by the BDA. Later, as the allotment was of several parcels of the land, the allotment made to the mother of the vendor of the petitioner, is as follows: ಎ) 1/2 x 8.30 x 24.52 = 101.76 ಚದರ ೕಟ. 5. All others documents/record reflect the name of the vendor's mother. The mother of the vendor gifts the property in favour of the vendor of the petitioner on 04.03.2017. 6. The gift deed results in daughter becoming the owner of the property. The daughter then executes the sale deed in favour of the present petitioner then begins the problem. The land is contiguous to both the petitioner and respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 approaches this Court calling in question the allotment letter dated 23.02.2016. The allotment was not only in favour of the mother of the vendor of the petitioner but it contains other allotment as well. But the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 writ petition comes to be dismissed. Writ appeal against the said order comes to be dismissed. After dismissal of these two, it transpires on interference by respondent No.2, the petitioner institutes a suit in O.S.No.5524/2024 seeking declaration, possession, recovery of possession, mandatory injunction and several other reliefs. The said suit is pending adjudication. All the parties to the present lis are parties in the suit. Therefore, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the allotment should not be made in favour of any one, as steps are being taken by the BDA to allot the land sought in favour of respondent No.2 herein. 7. Learned counsel Sri Prithveesh.M.K., appearing for respondent No.2 would, in an attempt to steer clear the controversy, takes this Court to the documents appended to the statement of objections. It is his submission that the petitioner himself had made a representation to allot marginal land abutting site No.24/1. Therefore, they two are different lands. 8. Be those submissions as they are, the counsel for the parties would now submit that the suit is pending with the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 aforesaid prayers. The allotment of the land being made subject to the out come of the suit that would suffice for the present. 9. In the light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition with a direction to the BDA not to allot the land that is sought, either to the petitioner or to respondent No.2 herein and take process of allotment, only after the decision that would be arrived in the civil Suit. The civil suit is of the year 2024. Therefore, to infuse finality into the civil suit would not be appropriate. However, I deem it appropriate to observe that the concerned Court shall endeavor to expeditiously dispose of the civil suit as it would lay controversy to rest. 10. In that light, the following: ORDER i) Writ petition is disposed of. ii) The allotment of land that is subject matter of the present lis shall await the decision of civil suit in O.S.No.5524/2024. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30231 WP No. 16250 of 2025 iii) The BDA is directed not to take process of allotment of land either to the petitioner or to respondent No.2 Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE VM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24