- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33550 WP No. 20961 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 20961 OF 2025 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. N SARALA W/o SRI N. NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. SMT. N. GAJALAKSHMI, D/O SRI N. NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, BOTH AT NO.65/3-1, PID NO.10-1/3-1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB, WARD NO.44, MARAPPANAPALYA, BANGALORE-560 022. …PETITIONERS [BY SRI. C G GOPALASWAMY, ADVOCATE (ABSENT)] AND: 1. THE BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 002, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER. Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33550 WP No. 20961 of 2025 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT SUB-DIVISION, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE, 1ST FLOOR, 12TH MAIN, 11TH CROSS, NAGAPURA, BANGALORE-560 086. 3. SMT. R. JAYALAKSHMI, W/O. SRI N. RADHAKRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.23/1, 5TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, LN COLONY, YESHWANTHPUR, BANGALORE-560 022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.V. MURALIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R.1 AND R.2; SRI. MITHUN G.A., ADVOCATE FOR R.3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED APRIL 02, 2025 IN REV.APPEAL NO.1217/2019 BEFORE THE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE (CH-1), AT ANNEXURE-E., ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33550 WP No. 20961 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER At the behest of respondent no.3, respondent nos.1 and 2-Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) have initiated action against the construction being put up by the petitioners. It has resulted in petitioners preferring appeal No.1217/2019 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, wherein, the petitioners herein have challenged the action of BBMP. In the said proceedings, respondent no.3 herein has been permitted to implead herself as respondent no.3 by way of impugned order dated 02.04.2025 passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The case of the petitioners is that respondent no.3 is not a just and necessary party and the petitioners have challenged only the action of BBMP and it was not required for Karnataka Appellate Tribunal to implead respondent no.3 as a party to the proceedings. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33550 WP No. 20961 of 2025 3. It is noticed that BBMP has initiated action based on the complaint received by respondent no.3. The Karnataka Appellate Tribunal under the circumstances is of the opinion that respondent no.3 is just and necessary party. Under the circumstances, I do not see any error in the order passed by Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2