- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51567 WP No. 25938 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 25938 OF 2025 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: SRI. A.M. HANUMANTHE GOWDA S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED 48 YEARS, R/O NO.SRI LAKSHMI NURSERY FARM, 4TH BLOCK, SRI M VISVESWARAIAH LAYOUT, ULLALU BASTHI VILLAGE, ULLALU DAKHALE, ULLALU UPANAGARA POST, BENGALURU - 560 056. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VEERESH MAHESH UPPIN.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020. BY ITS COMMISSIONER 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KUMARA PARK WEST, Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51567 WP No. 25938 of 2025 BENGALURU - 560 020. 4. SRI GALISWAMY S/O LATE GALAPPA @ DODDANARASAPPA, AGE 75 YEARS, R/O NO. 37, 2ND MAIN ROAD, HBCS LAYOUT II STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 076. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISHA A S., AGA FOR R1; SRI. VASANTHA., ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO I) ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE BDA-RESPONDENT NO.4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DT 12-04-2024 MARKED AS ANNEXURE -N AND THEREBY NOT TO ALLOT ANY SITE IN FAVOUR OF RESPONDENT NO.4 IN LIEU OF ACQUISITION OF THE LAND BEARING SY NO.15/2 MEASURING 3 ACRE 38 GUNTAS OF K. KRISHNASAGARA VILLAGE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51567 WP No. 25938 of 2025 ORAL ORDER Learned Addl. Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1. 2. Sri. Vasantha, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondent-BDA not to allot any site in favour of respondent No.4 in lieu of acquisition of land bearing Survey No.15/2 measuring 3 acres 38 guntas of K.Krishnasagar Village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk (for short 'subject property'), contending that the petitioner has a superior right over the said property. 4. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.4 had executed General Power of Attorney (for short 'the GPA'), affidavit and sale related documents in his favour thereby, permitting the petitioner to purchase and deal with the subject property. A general notification was - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51567 WP No. 25938 of 2025 issued in respect of the subject property, respondent No.4 by allegedly playing fraud had obtained the compromise decree in OS.No.172/2021.The petitioner has thereafter filed OS.No.213/2024 seeking declaration that the compromise decree is vitiated by fraud and has the effect of depriving him of his legitimate rights. Pending adjudication, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 12.04.2024 (Annexure-N) to the respondent-BDA, requesting that no site be allotted to respondent No.4 in lieu of the acquisition. Apprehending that respondent-BDA is proceeding with such allotment, the present writ petition is filed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, OS.No.213/2024 has been dismissed under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. However, learned counsel submits that he is unaware whether the petitioner has preferred any appeal against the said order. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51567 WP No. 25938 of 2025 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the dispute raised by the petitioner pertains to title, validity of the GPA and the execution of document by respondent No.4 and the legality of the compromise decree entered into between the family members of respondent No.4, such issues involve disputed questions of fact and require adjudication on evidence, which cannot be undertaken in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The appropriate forum for determination of such rights is the Civil Court. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits, reserving liberty to the petitioner to agitate his rights, if so advised, before the appropriate forum, in accordance with law. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13