IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.17893 OF 2025 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

1 . C. GANESH NARAYAN S/O LATE C.V. NARAYAN AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 44, OSBORNE ROAD ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560042. 2 . C. GANESH NARAYAN HUF REPRESENTED BY ITS KARTA C. GANESH NARAYAN NO. 44, OSBORNE ROAD ULSOOR, BENGALURU-560042.

3 . C. KRISHNIAH CHETTY & CO PVT LTD.

B BLOCK, THE TOUCHSTONE NO. 2/4, MAIN GUARD CROSS ROAD BENGALURU-560001.

REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR AND AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE C. GANESH NARAYAN (ROC), BANGALORE.

...PETITIONERS (BY SRI. K.N. PHANINDRA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. KRUTIKA RAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH REVENUE SECRETARY M S BUILDING, DR B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE-560001.

2 . BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE THROUGH ZONAL COMMISSIONER EAST ZONE, MAYOHALL, ASHOK NAGAR BENGALURU-560001.

3 . MEDICAL OFFICER BBMP EAST ZONE SHIVAJINAGAR, QUEENS ROAD BANGALORE-560052.

4 . C. VINOD HAYAGRIV S/O C.V. HAYAGRIV AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS RESIDING AT 'KRISHNA PRASAD' 1/34 ULSOOR ROAD W.H. HANUMANTHAPPA LAYOUT BANGALORE-560042.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.K. KENCHE GOWDA, AGA FOR R1;

SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3; SRI. JAYAKUMAR S. PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. HITESH GOWDA .B.J, ADVOCATE FOR R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND

227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING FOR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE THEREOF, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED NOTICES DATED 11.06.2025 BEARING NO. AA.Y.SHI.NA/P.R/82/2025-26 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND 18.06.2025 BEARING NO. AA.Y.SHI.NA/P.R/89/25-26 ANNEXURE-A1 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.3, MEDICAL HEALTH OFFICER, SHIVAJINAGAR RANGE, BBMP, BENGALURU AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 03.07.2025, THIS DAY ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED THEREIN, AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM C.A.V ORDER Petitioner No.3, a private limited company, in which petitioner No.1 is the Director, is aggrieved by the notices issued by respondent No.3 dated 11.06.2025 and 18.06.2025 vide Annexures-A and A1 respectively. The said notices are impugned in the captioned petition.

2. The facts leading to the case are as under:

Petitioner No.3, namely C. Krishniah Chetty & Company Private Limited, is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and is engaged in the jewellery trade and allied business activities from the ground and first floors of the schedule premises. The said premises, according to the petitioners, is lawfully leased to Petitioner No.3 by Petitioner Nos.1 and 2. The petitioners assert that the company was originally incorporated under the name Deepali Company Private Limited, and subsequently underwent a change of name in the year 2020. Petitioner No.1, in his personal as well as representative capacity, is a Director and shareholder of Petitioner No.3. The petitioners further submit that their business is a legitimate commercial enterprise, duly licensed under applicable municipal and statutory enactments, including registration under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, the Shops and Establishments Act, VAT laws, and a valid trade licence.

3. The petitioners contend that Respondent No.4, who is a cousin of Petitioner No.1, is a Director of a separate and distinct legal entity, C. Krishniah Chetty & Sons Private Limited. Respondent No.4 is a business rival and is engaged in multiple litigations against the petitioners. The disputes revolve around issues of ownership, control, and management of C. Krishniah Chetty & Sons Private Limited, and are currently sub judice before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).

4. According to the petitioners, Respondent No.4’s principal grievance is that Petitioner No.3 is conducting a competing jewellery business from an adjacent premises, Block 'B' which forms the subject matter of the present writ petition. Despite rai