- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8231 RP NO.164 OF 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL REVIEW PETITION NO.164 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.30258 OF 2024 BETWEEN: SRI. B.N. LAKSHMAIAH S/O LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO.24, BIG BANAYAN TREE ROAD, BHEEMANAKUPPE, KENGERI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH, BENGALURU - 560 060. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. K.P. BHUVAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE SECRETARY BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020. 3. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY-4 BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8231 RP NO.164 OF 2025 T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD. KUMARAPARK WEST, BENGALURU - 560 020. 4. SRI. T.M. NEELAKANTAIAH S/O. LATE MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. 5. SRI. T.M. VISHVESHWARAIAH S/O. LATE MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS. 6. SRI. T.M. SHIVANANDA S/O. LATE MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. 7. SRI. T.M. MAHESHWARA S/O. LATE MAHADEVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS. RESPONDENTS 4 TO 7 ARE R/AT NO.660, WARD NO.7 M.G. ROAD, A.T.B. PARCEL SERVICE, AGRAHARA, RAMANAGARA, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 571 511. …RESPONDENTS THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 24.02.2025 PASSED BY THIS COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.30258 OF 2024 PASSED AND PASS AN APPROPRIATE ORDER ON MERITS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8231 RP NO.164 OF 2025 ORAL ORDER In this Review Petition, the petitioner is seeking review of order dated 24.02.2025 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.30258 of 2024. 2. Heard and perused the material on record. 3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that no error apparent on the face of the record is made out warranting interference. 4. Accordingly, Review Petition is dismissed. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2