- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4531 WP No. 18255 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 18255 OF 2025 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. S RAMESH S/O SRI M SUBRAMANYAM AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/AT NO. 57, 5TH MAIN PARAMHAMSA ROAD, YADAVAGIRI MYSURU 570 020. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ARIHANT R SUNGAY ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T P RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MYSURU CITY CORPORATION NEXT TO BANUMAIAH COLLEGE, SAYYAJI RAO ROAD, AGRAHARA, CHAMRAJPURA MYSURU 570 024 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE ZONAL COMMISSIONER MYSURU CITY CORPORATION, CITIZEN SERVICE CENTER AND ZONAL OFFICE-06 NEW SHESHADRI AYAR ROAD, MANDI MOHALLA, MYSURU 570 020 Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4531 WP No. 18255 of 2025 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, MYSURU MIRZA ROAD, NEAR GANDHIVANA PARK, LOKARANJAN MAHAL ROAD, MYSURU 570 010 4. SMT. DIVYA RAMESH W/O SRI S M PUNETHA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO. 494, 5TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, LOKANAYAKA NAGAR, METAGALLI POST, MYSURU 570 016 5. SRI S M PUNETHA S/O SRI MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO. 494, 5TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN, LOKANAYAKA NAGAR, METAGALLI POST, MYSURU 570 016 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GAURAV G.K. ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2; SMT. SPOORTHI V. HCGP FOR R3; SRI. V.B. SHIVAKUMAR ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-(I) DIRECT RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3 TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION AGAINST RESPONDENT NOS 4 AND 5 FOR RUNNING A LODGING HOUSE WITHOUT A VALID TRADE LICENCE IN EXERCISE OF THEIR POWERS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ACT, 1976.(II) DECLARE THAT RESPONDENT NOS. 4 AND 5 HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO RUN THE LODGE, FRIENDS RESIDENCY, IN THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY WITHOUT HAVING A VALID RENTAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4531 WP No. 18255 of 2025 AGREEMENT IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY.(III) DIRECT RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3 TO CONSIDER AND TAKE ACTION ON THE PETITIONER'S LETTER DATED 13.06.2025 (ANNEXURE V).(IV) GRANT COST OF THESE PROCEEDINGS. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner is before this court seeking for the following reliefs: (i) “Direct Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to take necessary action against Respondent Nos 4 and 5 for running a lodging house without a valid Trade Licence in exercise of their powers under the provisions of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976; (ii) Declare that Respondent Nos. 4 & 5 have no authority to run the lodge, “Friends Residency”, in the schedule property without having a valid rental agreement in respect of the schedule property; (iii) Direct Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to consider and take action on the Petitioner’s letter date 13.06.2025 (Annexure V); (iv) Grant cost of these proceedings; and (v) Pass such other orders or directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.” - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4531 WP No. 18255 of 2025 2. The petitioner is the landlord and respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are the tenants. The very dispute between them has been dealt with by this Court today in its Order in W.P. No.15610 of 2025, which may be read as part and parcel of this Order. 3. The contention of the petitioner in this matter is that necessary action has not been taken by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 from stopping the running of the lodging house without a valid trade licence under the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976. These aspects have been dealt with in the aforesaid order and have come to a conclusion that the official respondents cannot on the basis of a complaint filed by the landlord initiate action for cancellation of license on account of the objections of the landlord. More so, when the landlord has already filed a suit for eviction which is pending in Commercial O.S. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4531 WP No. 18255 of 2025 No. 178 of 2025 before the Principal District and Session Judge, Mysore. 4. In that view of the matter, the reliefs which have been sought for in the present writ petition cannot be granted. 5. The petition stands dismissed. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE BVK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 24