- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13984 WP No. 39782 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 39782 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. T.L.LOKESH S/O T.V.LAKAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT # 165, 1ST MAIN ROAD J.R.LAYOUT, HARALUR H.S.R.POST, BANGALORE-560 102. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MOHAN B.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUNDARAMMA W/O KRISHNAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT # 13, F BLOCK J.P.NAGAR, MYSORE-570 031. 2. MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY JLB ROAD, MYSORE-570 005. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.B.SHARATH GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13984 WP No. 39782 of 2025 THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION AGAINST THE ILLEGAL CONSTRUCTION PUT UP BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1, ON THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NO.1433, SITUATED AT SHANTHAVARI GOPALGOWDA NAGAR MYSORE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES ACT 1987 AND BYE LAWS BY CONSIDERING THE COMPLAINTS DATED 21.08.2021 AND 28.11.2025 I.E., ANNEXURE - E AND G AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER The case of the petitioner is that, he was allotted property bearing No.1433 situated at Shantaveri Gopalagowda Nagara, Mysuru formed by respondent no.2-Mysuru Urban Development Authority (MUDA). However, respondent no.1 is illegally constructing a building on the site belonging to the petitioner. Hence, he requested respondent no.2-MUDA to interfere and remove the construction and deliver back him the possession of the property. The MUDA has issued an endorsement dated 14.06.2022 to respondent no.1 in this regard, which reads as under: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13984 WP No. 39782 of 2025 "ªÉÄîÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ, G¯ÉÃRzÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ CfðzÁgÀjUÉ ¤ªÉñÀ£À UÀÄwð¹PÉÆqÀ®Ä PÉÆÃjgÀĪÀ ªÉÄÃgÉUÉ ¸ÀܼÀ ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV ¤.¸ÀA.1433gÀ eÁUÀzÀ°è ¤.¸ÀA.1434 gÀªÀgÀÄ PÀlÖqÀ ¤«Äð¹gÀĪÀÅzÀÄ PÀAqÀħA¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ. ¸ÀܼÀ §zÀ¯ÁªÀuÉUÁV C£ÀĪÀÄw ¥ÀqÉ¢gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ F ¥ÀvÀæ vÀ®Ä¦zÀ 10 ¢£ÀUÀ¼ÉƼÀUÁV zÁR¯É MzÀV¸À®Ä PÉÆÃjzÉ. vÀ¦àzÀÝ°è C£À¢üPÀÈvÀ PÀlÖqÀ vÉgÀªÀÅUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ PÁ£ÀƤ£ÀAvÉ PÀæªÀÄPÉÊUÉƼÀî¯ÁUÀĪÀÅzÀÄ JAzÀÄ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ w½¹zÉ." 2. However, as no action has been taken by respondent no.2, the present writ petition is filed with the following prayers: "a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent no.2 to take appropriate action against the illegal construction put up by the Respondent no.1, on the property of the Petitioner bearing no.1433, situated at Shanthavari Gopalgowda Nagar Mysore in accordance with the provisions of Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act 1987 and bye laws by considering the complaints dated 21.08.2021 and 28.11.2025 i.e., Annexure - E and G. b) Pass such other orders as this hon'ble court may deem fit taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the Petition." 3. The case of the petitioner is that, respondent no. 1 is putting up a construction on his property. As the property is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13984 WP No. 39782 of 2025 allotted by MUDA, he wants MUDA to safeguard his possession. This is impermissible. Once MUDA forms a layout and allots a site in favour of a third party, it is the responsibility of that third party to safeguard the possession himself. If any third party were to encroach upon the said property, he has to approach a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction to enforce his right over the said property. He cannot demand that MUDA should safeguard his rights. 4. It is needless to state that, in the original suit he is always at liberty to rely upon the correspondences done by MUDA with concerned parties (endorsement at Annexure-F in this case). However, mere issuance of an endorsement as issued at Annexure-F in the instant case will not give a right to the petitioner to demand action by MUDA against respondent no.1. 5. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed subject to the aforementioned observation and liberty is granted to the petitioner to work out his remedies against respondent no.1 before the appropriate civil Court and if he so approaches, the same will be decided by the appropriate Civil Court based upon - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:13984 WP No. 39782 of 2025 the pleadings and evidence let in before it without being influenced by any of the observations made herein above in respect of the ownership and possession of the property. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4