- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26383 RP No. 606 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REVIEW PETITION NO. 606 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. M/S BANGALORE ADITHYA CONSTRUCTIONS (P) LTD NO.719, 8TH MAIN, III PHASE, J P NAGAR, BANGALORE-560078 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR. M N SATYESH, S/O M N NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. DEEPAK D.C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, M S BUILDING, DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001 BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. THE ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26383 RP No. 606 of 2024 T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BANGALORE-560020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAVYA SHEKAR, AGA FOR R1; SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF CPC 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 28.10.2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO.21799/2021 (LA BDA) AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS 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 E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondents respondent-State. Sri. K. Krishna, learned counsel accepts notice for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26383 RP No. 606 of 2024 3. In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking review of the order dated 28.10.2024 in W.P.No.21799 of 2021. 4. Sri. Deepak D.C., learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner contended that, though the petitioner herein is a subsequent purchaser, however, the petitioner herein has not challenged the acquisition proceedings in the writ petition. Accordingly, sought for interference of this Court. 5. Smt. Navya Shekhar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent- State and Sri. K. Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that the prayer in the writ petition relates to challenging the impugned notifications passed by the respondents, for acquiring the schedule property for formation of 'Sir - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26383 RP No. 606 of 2024 M. Visweswaraiah Layout' and petitioner being a subsequent purchaser cannot challenged the same. 6. In the light of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner herein is subsequent purchaser and in view of the declaration of law made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Kumar & Anr., Vs. Union of India & Ors., reported in (2019) 10 SCC 229, subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge the acquisition proceedings and/or lapsing of the acquisition proceedings. Therefore, there is no error apparent on the face of the record. Accordingly, the Revision Petition is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21