Sri. Premasagar Gowda v. The State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:5307( WP(No.(16552(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU(

THDATED(THIS(THE(30 (DAY(OF(JANUARY,(2026(

BEFORE( THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(S(SUNIL(DUTT(YADAV( WRIT(PETITION(NO.(16552(OF(2025((BDA)( BETWEEN:((

, SRI.,PREMASAGAR,GOWDA, S/O,N.,SRIKANTA,,, AGED,25,YEARS,,, STR/AT,NO.,25/2,,1 ,,MAIN,ROAD,,,

ST1 ,,A-CROSS,,MALLATHAHALLI,LAKE,,, TH SMV,LAYOUT,,9 ,,BLOCK,,, BENGALURU,-,,560,056., …PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,M.B.CHANDRA,CHOODA,,ADVOCATE), AND:(

1., THE,STATE,OF,KARNATAKA,,

Digitally BY,ITS,SECRETARY,TO,GOVERNMENT,,, signedtiby VIDYA0G0R DEPT.,OF,HOUSING,AND,URBAN,DEVELOPMENT,, Location: BENGALURU,-,560,001.,HIGH COURT0OF , KARNATAKA

2., THE,BANGALORE,DEVELOPMENT,AUTHORITY,, T.,CHOWDAIAH,ROAD,,, KUMARAPARK,WEST,,, BENGALURU,-,560,020,, REP,BY,ITS,COMMISSIONER., ,

3., THE,REVENUE,OFFICER,, NORTH,DIVISION,,BDA,,, BENGALURU,-,560,032., NC:(2026:KHC:5307( WP(No.(16552(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

4., CANARA,BANK,, ARM,BRANCH-1,,NO.,88,,, M.,G.,ROAD,,BENGALURU,-,560,001,, REP,BY,ITS,MANAGER., …RESPONDENTS, (BY,SMT.,SAVITHRAMMA,,AGA,FOR,R1;, ,,,,,,SRI.,AJAY,KUMAR,M.,,ADV.,FOR,R2,AND,R3;, ,,,,,,SRI.,VIGNESH,SHETTY,,ADV.,FOR,R4), , THIS,W.P.,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226,AND,227,OF, THE,CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,PRAYING,TO,QUASH,THE,ORDER, BEARING, NO.BDA/REVENUE(N)/20/2025-26, DATED, 29/05/25, PASSED, BY, THE, RESPONDENT, NO.3, VIDE, ANNEXURE-N,, BY, WAY, OF, WRIT, OF, CERTIORARI,, IN, SO, FAR, IT, RELATES, TO, RESIDENTIAL, SITE, BEARING, NO.91,, HAVING, PID, NO.6000020091, COMPRISED, IN, RESIDENTIALLY, CONVERTED, LAND,PROPERTY,BEARING,SY.NO.62/P1,MEASURING,1,ACRES, 20, GUNTAS, SITUATED, AT, LAKE, MIST, LAYOUT,, JARAKBANDEKAVAL,VILLAGE,,YELAHANKA,HOBLI,,BENGALURU, NORTH,TALUK,,BENGALURU,DISTRICT,AND,ETC.,,, , THIS, PETITION,, COMING, ON, FOR, ORDERS,, THIS, DAY,, ORDER,WAS,MADE,THEREIN,AS,UNDER:, CORAM:, HON'BLE,MR.,JUSTICE,S,SUNIL,DUTT,YADAV, , (

ORAL ORDER

W.P.No.16552/2025 is de-linked from the connected matters and ordered separately.

¶2The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the order passed by respondent No.3 at Annexure-N, whereby katha standing in the name of the petitioner was cancelled. Various contentions have been raised in the present petition regarding the correctness of the action of the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) in cancelling katha standing in the name of the petitioner.

¶3It is noticed that during the pendency of the proceedings, the katha is stated to have been restored in the name of the petitioner. Such assertion by the impleading applicant is not controverted. The impleading applicant has filed a memo and produced the proceedings of the BDA which would indicate that the cancellation of katha in the name of the petitioner has been restored.

¶4Taking note that the endorsement at Annexure-N in effect does not survive, the legal grievance of the petitioner stands restored and the petition is disposed of as not calling for adjudication.

¶5However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by virtue of Annexure-N certain rights have been created in favour of the bank and subsequent developments have taken place including issuance of sale certificate which has prejudiced the petitioner.

¶6The petitioner's grievance is regards certain actions in the interregnum between Annexure-N and the restoration of katha. It is open for the petitioner to take legal recourse available as regards such action, if aggrieved. All contentions in that regard are kept open.

¶7Learned counsel for the impleading applicant submits that certain rights have flowed to the impleading applicant. That however cannot be a subject matter of adjudication in the present petition, in light of the

subsequent events. All legal contentions of the impleading applicant as well are kept open to be raised appropriately.

¶8The impleading application is disposed of, as not calling for further adjudication as the contentions have been noticed above.

Accordingly, petition is disposed of.

Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

MCR