IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
RAM MOHAN REDDY, J.
SRI KAMLESH KUMAR – PETITIONER
Versus
THE COMMISSIONER, BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE & ORS. – RESPONDENTS
WRIT PETITION No.29795/2014 (LB-BBMP)
Decided on: 19TH NOVEMBER 2014
The neighbour of respondents 4 and 5 has preferred this petition for the following reliefs:
(a) to issue a writ of mandamus directing the dismantling of the illegal construction as per the provisions of Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act made by respondents 4 and 5 on property bearing No.8/1, 2nd cross, Swasti Road (Lakshmi Road Cross), Shanthi Nagar, Bangalore-560 027. Further appoint a Court Commissioner to carry out the said exercise on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, in the interest of justice.
(b) Prohibit respondents 4 and 5 from occupying the building constructed on property bearing No.8/1, 2nd Cross, Swasti Road (Lakshmi Road Cross), Shanthi Nagar, Bangalore-560 027 till the removal of the illegal construction.
2. The immovable property bearing No.8/1, II Cross, Lakshmi Road Cross, Bangalore, belonging to respondents 4 and 5, jointly, is said to be located adjacent to property No.8/2 belonging to the petitioner. It is alleged that respondents 4 and 5 commenced construction of the building on property No.8/1 in violation of the Building Byelaws of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, for short ‘BBMP’ and the Building Plan sanction for construction of a residential building, following which petitioner made a representation to respondents 1 to 3-BBMP which when not considered led to filing W.P.No.4972/2012, whence this Court directed the BBMP to initiate action to remove the illegal construction by order dated 28.11.2012. According to the petitioner, construction of the building by respondents 4 and 5 was commenced during June, 2012 and by the time writ petition was filed, ground, first and second floors were erected, and in the process of laying the roof for the third floor. It is further stated that the Asst. Executive Engineer issued notice under Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, for short ‘KMC Act’, requiring respondents 4 and 5 to remove the illegal construction followed by a final order of demolition which was impugned in Appeal No.1344/2012 filed by respondents 4 and 5 before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. Despite the said orders under the KMC Act, respondents 4 and 5, it is alleged, with impunity, continued the illegal construction of the third and part of the fourth floor though without sanction. Therefore, petitioner filed W.P.No.3876/2013 for appropriate directions to BBMP to remove the illegal construction, more particularly over the third and fourth floors which was disposed of by order dated 6.11.2013 Annexure-B, with a direction that Appeal No.1344/2012 pending on the file of the KAT be disposed of within two months therefrom, while the BBMP was directed to take action in accordance with law with regard to construction put up by respondents 4 and 5, not subject matter of Appeal No.1344/2012. It is further stated that the order of demolition, subject matter of Appeal No.1344/2012 did not relate to illegal construction put up by respondents 4 and 5 on the third and fourth floors of the property. In addition, it is stated that the KAT, by Order dated 4.3.2014 allowed the appeal, set-aside the order of confirmation and remitted the proceeding for fresh consideration over violation of the sanctioned plan. Petitioner asserts to have addressed a letter dated 28.4.2014 to the BBMP requesting them to take action to remove the illegal construction.
3. According to the petitioner, the building plan sanction as per LP No.OL/SP/1309/11-12 permitted the 4th and 5th respondents to put up construction of stilt, ground, first and second floors, on site bearing No.8/1, II cross, Lakshmi Road Cross, Shanthinagar. The plan so sanctioned though required 4th and 5th respondents to leave set back areas in the stilt floor measuring 4.10 mtrs on the front, 2.70 mtrs on hind portion; 1.0 mtr on the left and 2.50 on the right side of the said property, nevertheless, put up construction of the building leaving a front set back of 1-1½ ft; on hind side- 1½ to 2 ft.; on the left side 1-1½ ft and; on th
Priyanka Estates International Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Assam (AIR 2010 SC 1030)
Pratibha Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
Shanti Sports Club v. Union of India (AIR 2010 SC 433)
Friends Colony Development Committee v. State of Orissa (AIR 2005 SC 1)
Dipak Kumar Mukherjee v. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.