- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33434-DB WA No. 1047 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT APPEAL NO. 1047 OF 2024 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: C SAROJAMMA, W/O N.BABU REDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.78, OPP. MILK DAIRY, 0WARD NO.13, J.P. LAYOUT, ANEKAL TOWN-562 106, BENGALURU URBAN DIST. …APPELLANT (BY MS. ANAGHA.J PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SRINIVAS S V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGLAURU-560 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT (M AND UDAS). 2. THE COMMISSIONER, DIRECTORATE OF MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, 9TH FLOOR, V.V.TOWER, DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 3. THE CHIEF OFFICER, TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, ANEKAL, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT-562 106. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.S HARISH, G.A FOR R-1 & 2; SRI LOKESH K.M, ADVOCATE FOR R-3) Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33434-DB WA No. 1047 of 2024 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO i) SET ASIDE THE FINAL ORDER DATED 04/04/2024 IN WP NO.7984/2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE, AND CONSEQUENTLY, ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION AS PRAYED FOR ii) GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEF/s. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of application, IA No.1/2024 is allowed. Delay of 40 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 04.04.2024 [impugned order] passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.7984/2023 (LB-RES). 3. The appellant had filed the said writ petition challenging an endorsement dated 21.02.2023 issued by respondent No.3, whereby, the appellant's request for measurement of the subject property was declined. 4. The appellant claims that she is the owner of the subject land pursuant to the Sale Deed dated 25.01.2019. The revenue entries - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33434-DB WA No. 1047 of 2024 have also been made in the relevant katha recording the name of the appellant. 5. The appellant had filed an application for measurement of the subject property, on the ground that certain miscreants have been removing the boundary stones placed for marking the boundary of the subject property. 6. The said application was rejected by the impugned endorsement, on the ground that the property in the same katha was subject matter of dispute before this Court in RSA No. 626/2010. The appellant had pointed out that the said appeal had since been disposed of and there is no dispute pending before this Court. 7. Notwithstanding that the ground on which the appellant's application was rejected, no longer exists, the learned Single Judge had declined to issue any directions for measurement of the subject land on the ground that the appellant had not justified why the subject land was required to be measured. 8. Clearly, the said reasoning is ex-facie erroneous, as the appellant had indicated that the measurement was necessary, as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33434-DB WA No. 1047 of 2024 certain persons had interfered and demolished the boundary stones. It is evident that there are disputes regarding boundaries of the subject land. It is also material to note that the appellant’s application for measurement had not been rejected on the ground that the appellant had not justified the same, but on the ground that the land comprising in the same khata was the subject matter of disputes pending in this Court. 9. Concededly, the said ground does not exists and therefore, it would follow that the appellant's application is required to be considered. 10. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and direct respondent No.3 to consider the appellant's application dated 12.10.2022 and take necessary steps in accordance with law. 11. The writ appeal is allowed in the above terms. 12. Pending application is also disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE tsn*/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38