Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4707 (KAR)

SRI KUNAL MANOJ JAIN v. GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY

WP/9981/2026 · 2026-04-07

M I Arun

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18846 WP No. 9981 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 9981 OF 2026 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. KUNAL MANOJ JAIN S/O MANOJ KUMAR JAIN AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT NO.61, 2ND FLOOR SHRADDHANANDA BHAVAN ROAD NEAR LABDHI STORES VISVESHWARAPURAM BENGALURU SOUTH BENGALURU-560 004. &PETITIONER (BY SMT. MAYUR D.BHANU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS BBMP CORPORATION CIRCLE N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002. REP. BY ITS CHIEF COMMISSIONER. 2. BENGALURU CENTRAL CITY CORPORATION GANDHINAGARA ZONE ANNEXURE-3, BUILDING GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY OFFICE PREMISES N.R.SQUARE, HUDSON CIRCLE Digitally signed by GEETHA P G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18846 WP No. 9981 of 2026 BENGALURU-560 002. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU CENTRAL CITY CORPORATION GANDHINAGARA ZONE ANNEXURE-3, BUILDING GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY OFFICE PREMISES N.R.SQUARE, HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 002. 4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CHAMARAJPET WARD OFFICE AT NANJAMBA AGRAHARA CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560 018. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR DIRECTION OR APPROPRIATE ORDER OF WRIT DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.2, 3 AND 4 TO FORTHWITH CEASE FROM ALL UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE IN RELATION TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY PROPERTY/SITE BEARING MUNICIPAL NO.96 (OLD NO.95 AND 96) PID NO.46- 4-96 MEASURING EAST TO WEST 60 FEET AND NORTH TO SOUTH 108FT IN ALL MEASURING 6480 SQ FEET SITUATED AT 2ND MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU WITHIN THE LIMITS OF EARLIER BBMP, NOW BENGALURU CENTRAL CITY CORPORATION WARD NO.140 BELONGING TO THE PETITIONER AND CO-OWNERS AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18846 WP No. 9981 of 2026 ORAL ORDER Action has been initiated against the property of the petitioner by the respondents-Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) on the ground that he is putting up illegal construction. The same has been challenged by the petitioner in the instant petition. The main ground of the petitioner is that the property of the petitioner has been sealed by the respondent authorities without issuing any notice to him as contemplated in law. On the said ground, the following prayers are made: "a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or direction or appropriate order of writ directing the Respondent No 2, 3 and 4 to forthwith cease from all unlawful interference in relation to immovable Property property/site bearing Municipal No .96 (old no 95 and 96) PID No 46-4-96 measuring East to West 60 Feet and North to South 108ft in all measuring 6480 Sq Feet situated at 2nd Main Road, Chamarajpet, Bengaluru within the limits of earlier BBMP, now Bengaluru Central City Corporation Ward No 140 belonging to the petitioner and co-owners. b. Pass any such other order as deem fit in the circumstances of the case." 2. Learned counsel for the respondents-GBA upon instructions, submits that, notices have been sent to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18846 WP No. 9981 of 2026 petitioner by Registered Post Acknowledgement Due. He has produced copy of the notice along with receipt for the perusal of the Court. The counsel for respondents further submits that action against the petitioner will be proceeded with only in the manner known to law and not otherwise. 3. I am satisfied by the submission of learned counsel for the respondents insofar as it relates to the manner in which action has been initiated. I do not find any error in the procedure adopted by the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner is not able to establish that the statements made by the contesting respondent is false. 4. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40