- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44819 RP No. 6 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ REVIEW PETITION NO. 6 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER, N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560002. 2. THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER (ESTATES) BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, BANGALORE-560002. THE PETITIONERS ARE REPRESENTED BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR PATIL, HEAD OF THE LEGAL CELL AND DELEGATED AUTHORITY, BBMP, BENGALURU. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SANJEEV B.L., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KIRLOSKAR ELECTRIC COMPANY EMPLOYEES HOUSING CO-OP. SOCIETY (REGD.,) HAVING ITS REGD. OFFICE AT NO.779-A, N. GANGANARASIAH ROAD 5TH STAGE, KIRLOSKAR LAYOUT, HESARAGHATTA ROAD, NAGASANDRA POST, BANGALORE-560073 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY SRI RAGHAVENDRA S/O LATE SRI. SRINIVASACHAR, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44819 RP No. 6 of 2024 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001 3. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGALURU-560020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANIL KUMAR R., ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SRI. B. BOPANNA, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2; SRI. B.S.SACHIN, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 26.09.2022 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP 65620/2016 (LB-BMP) AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER This petition is filed to review the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.65620/2016. 2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent No.1, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.2 as well as - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44819 RP No. 6 of 2024 the learned counsel for respondent No.3, this Court is of the opinion that the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by this Court in W.P.No.65620/2016 does not warrant any review. 3. Accordingly, this review petition is dismissed. 4. However, before parting from the case, it is relevant to note that this Court had directed the petitioners herein (respondent Nos.1 and 2 in W.P.No.65620/2016) to enter the name of the respondent No.1 herein (petitioner in W.P.No.65620/2016) in the property tax register in respect of a piece of land, which was not allotted a number in the layout plan. Having regard to the fact that the said piece of land lies between the site Nos.45 and 46. The same shall be treated as Site No.45A. The petitioners herein shall enter the name of respondent No.1 herein in the municipal records relating to Site No.45A. The respondent no.3 shall take appropriate steps for incorporating Site No.45A between Site No.45 and Site No.46. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE PMR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33