- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34758 WP No. 9802 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.9802 OF 2025 (KLR-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI KADARAPPA ALIAS CHIKKAKADARAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA SINCE DEAD REP BY HIS LR'S SRI. RAJAPPA S/O LATE KADARAPPA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, KALLABALU POST ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU -560105. 2. SRI. NARASIMHA S/O LATE KADARAPPA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, KALLABALU POST ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560105. 3. SRI. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS R/AT 120, MARUTHINAGAR KODIGEHALLI MAIN ROAD, SAHAKARNAGAR POST BENGALURU - 560092. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. BEERESHA H., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34758 WP No. 9802 of 2025 AND: 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVAN, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. SRI. MURALIDHARA S/O LATE SIPURAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, KALLABALU POST JIGANI HOBALI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU - 560105. 4. SRI. B.C. NARAYANAPPA S/O LATE SIPURAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BUKKASAGARA VILLAGE, KALLABALU POST, JIGANI HOBALI, ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 560105. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. SOMASHEKAR NAIDU, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 15.12.2021 PASSED IN R.P. NO. 100/2008-09 BY RESPONDENT NO.1 (ANNEXURE-A); REMAND - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34758 WP No. 9802 of 2025 BACK THEJESH, HCGP FOR EMATTER TO RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION ON MERITS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In the present writ petition, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 15.12.2021 (Annexure- A) passed in R.P.No.100/2008-09 by respondent No.1 and has sought a remand of the matter to Respondent No. 1 for fresh consideration. 3. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is noticed that there is a delay of more than four years in filing the present writ petition challenging the impugned order at Annexure-A. It is also evident from - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34758 WP No. 9802 of 2025 the order sheet maintained before Respondent No.1 that the proceedings remained pending from 2008 to 2021. The order sheet further reveals that, on several occasions, parties were represented before Respondent No. 1. 4. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners have approached this Court after an inordinate and unexplained delay. Further, the petitioners were not diligent in prosecuting the proceedings before Respondent No. 1, where the matter remained pending from 2008 to 2021. In these circumstances, no case is made out for interference with the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3