Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 74363 (KAR)

SMT. LALITHA v. THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WP/33891/2025 · 2025-11-26

S Sunil Dutt Yadav

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49045 WP No. 33891 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 33891 OF 2025 (LR) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LALITHA WIFE OF SRI PULLIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT BYLAHALLI, ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK-560 67. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRIDHAR S V., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, KRISHNARAJAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 036. 2. LATE. B. M. MANJUNATH, SINCE DECEASED, REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES SMT B M SUJATHAMMA DAUGHTER OF SRI LATE B.M. MANJUNATH AND Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49045 WP No. 33891 of 2025 WIFE OF SRI C.N. GANESH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHEEMASANDRA VILLAGE, NANADAGUDI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 129 3. SMT. SHOBHA, DAUGHTER OF SRI LATE B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI RADHAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, RESIDING AT KARAPPANAHALLI, NANADAGUDI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 122. 4. SMT. UMA, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI RAGHUNATH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT ANUPANAHALLI, SULIBELE HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 129. 5. SMT. LATHA, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI CHANNAKESHAVA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT GANGAPURA VILLAGE, NANADAGUDI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 122. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49045 WP No. 33891 of 2025 6. SMT. GEETHA, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI SHIVARAJ, S.C., AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING SOMAPPANAHALLI, CHANNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 135. 7. SMT. NAGASHRI, B.M., DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI ASHOK KUMAR, B.C., AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESIDING AT BYAPPANAHALLI, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK-560 049 8. SMT. BHAGYAMMA, DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI C.N. GANESH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT BIDARAHALLI, BIDARAHALLI HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST TALUK - 560 049 9. SMT. RADHIKA, B.M., DAUGHTER OF LATE SRI B.M. MANJUNATH AND WIFE OF SRI RAGHAVENDRA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHOKKASANDRA VILLAGE, NANADAGUDI HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 129. 10. THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49045 WP No. 33891 of 2025 KRISHNARAJAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 036. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V. SESHU, HCGP FOR R1 TO R10) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO A. CALL FOR RECORDS IN LRF 7(A) 116/BO/1999-2000 ON FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE URBAN, BANGALORE EAST TALUK, KRISHNARAJAPURAM, BANGALORE, CULMINATING IN THE PASSING OF THE ORDER IMPUGNED 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 Learned High Court Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1 and 10. 2. Petitioner has challenged the order of the 1st respondent - Additional Deputy Commissioner insofar as Spot Inspection was ordered on 12.09.2025. Petitioner has also sought for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider the application filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of CPC which is still pending before the 1st respondent. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49045 WP No. 33891 of 2025 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if final orders are passed on the basis of spot inspection, petitioner would be seriously prejudiced as petitioner's application for impleading is still pending consideration. 4. Accordingly, without any adjudication on merits of the matter, the 1st respondent - Additional Deputy Commissioner is directed to dispose of the application filed under Order I Rule 10(2) of CPC before proceeding further in the proceedings. 5. In light of the direction being limited only to disposal of impleading application, issuance of notice as regards private respondents is dispensed with. 6. Accordingly, petition is disposed of. All contentions on merits are kept open. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE VP