- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010159722025 NC: 2026:KHC:37086-DB WA No. 353 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 353 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. G SELVI W/O G.GAJARAJ AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO.1043, 6TH CROSS SRIAMAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 021 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NARASIMHA MURTHY G V, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE HEAD OFFICE, HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE - 560 002 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE DASARAHALLI DIVISION BAGALAKUNTE NAGASANDRA POST BANGALORE - 560 073 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE Digitally signed by AMBIKA H B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010159722025 NC: 2026:KHC:37086-DB WA No. 353 of 2025 DASARAHALLI ZONE BAGALAKUNTE NAGASANDRA POST BANGALORE - 560 073 4. THE COMMISSIONER BANGALORE DEVOLOPMENT AUTHORITY HEAD OFFICE, B.B. ROAD BANGALORE - 560 020 5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BANGALORE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE BOARD PEENYA SUB-DIVISION NW3 PEENYA, BANGALORE - 560 058 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B S SHRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR SRI B L SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 & SRI K KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER DATED 31.01.2025 IN W.P No. 11093/2021 (GM-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION No.11093/2021 (GM-RES) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010159722025 NC: 2026:KHC:37086-DB WA No. 353 of 2025 Court in Writ Petition No.11093/2021 (GM-RES). The appellant had filed the said writ petition, inter alia, praying as under: "A Writ or order or direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, directing to the Respondents No.1 to 5 to grant the alternative site or grant compensation in favour of petitioner in property site bearing No.223-A, in Sy.No.143 in residential layout formed by the Mysore Electro Chemical Works Employees Housing Co-operative Society Ltd. in measuring East to west northern side 45 feet, Southern side 60 feet and North to South - Eastern side 95 feet western side 90 feet, in total measuring 4856.25 Square feet out of 4856.25 the respondents are acquired the property of the petitioner about 3556 Sq. feet, situated at Laggere Village, MEC Colony, Yashwanthpura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, the petitioner made Representations before the respondents No.1 to 5 at ANNEXURE-E1 to E5." 2. The appellant has produced the sale deed dated 12.07.2004 executed by the Mysore Electro Chemical Works Limited Employees Co-operative Housing Society Limited in favour of the appellant, for sale of property bearing Site No.223A in Survey No.143 situated at Laggere Village, Yeshwantpura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, Bengaluru. The sale deed indicates that the said property had been acquired pursuant to a decree in O.S No.5770/1994 and a decree in O.S No.696/1997 in the Court of City Civil Judge, Bengaluru. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010159722025 NC: 2026:KHC:37086-DB WA No. 353 of 2025 3. It is the appellant's case that out of the 4856.25 sq. ft. area owned by him, 3556 sq. ft. has been acquired by the respondent authorities. The appellant claims that no notification has been issued and the appellant has also not been paid any compensation. In the aforesaid context, the appellant had made a representation for grant of an alternate site. 4. The learned Single Judge has rejected the said petition on the ground that it involves disputed questions of fact. The order also notes that the appellant had filed a suit for injunction before the XVI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City in O.S No.7604/2009 which was dismissed on 05.01.2013 and the appeal preferred against the said dismissal (RFA No.1242/2013) has also been rejected. It is noted that the said suit has been dismissed on the ground that the appellant had failed to produce approved plan and the witness examined on behalf of the appellant (PW1) had also admitted that neither any drainage nor roads have been laid in the layout. In the said view, the court declined to pass any injunction restraining the respondents from executing the public works. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010159722025 NC: 2026:KHC:37086-DB WA No. 353 of 2025 5. Plainly, the dismissal of the suit would not affect the appellant's right to claim compensation if the appellant's land has been used by the respondents for any public works. 6. In the aforesaid view, we set aside the impugned order and direct respondent Nos.2 and 4 to consider the representation of the appellant and communicate the decision to the appellant within a period of eight weeks from date. 7. The writ appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4