IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 11891 OF 2019 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

SRI. KIKKERI KRISHNAMURTHY S/O B S NARAYANA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO 22,SHOP STREET, BASAVANAGUDI BENGALURU – 560 004 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJESH MAHALE, SR. ADVOCATE FOR SRI.JAYARAJ D. S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N R SQUARE BENGALURU – 560 002

2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BASAVANAGUDI SUB DIVISION Digitally signed BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, by SHWETHA WARD NO 154, C T BED, OPP SSM SCHOOL, RAGHAVEN DRA THYAGARAJANAGAR Location: HIGH CHANNMANAKERE ACCHUKATTU COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU – 560 028

3. SMT. VIMALA NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, W/O N. NAGARAJ, 4. SMT. REKHA N.

AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, D/O N.NAGARAJ RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4 ARE R/AT NO.21 SHOP STREET, BASVANAGUDI, BENGALURU-560 004.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI.RAMESH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN APPEAL NO.274/2016 AS THE SAME IS NOT PROPER AND CORRECT.GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2019 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE R-1 AUTHORITY I.E., THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPEAL NO.274/2016 AND DIRECT THE R-2 NOT TO TAKE ANY COERCIVE STEPS AGAINST THE PETITONER/PETITIONER'S SCHEDULE PREMISES IN TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER PASSED U/S

321(3) OF THE K.M.C. ACT, 1976.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, 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;

a. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate order quashing vide ANNEXURE-A the Order dated 08.02.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 274/2016 as the same is not proper and correct; and b. Pass such other order / orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case including the costs of this Writ Petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

2. On the ground that construction had been put up by the petitioner without a sanction plan, proceedings had been taken up under Section 321 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short hereinafter referred to as “KMC Act, 1976”) , which was challenged by the petitioner before the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.274 of 2016, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 08.02.2019 and it is in that background that the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs.

3. The matter was pending for several years, the petitioner was granted several opportunities to produce the sanction plan in respect to the property since it was alleged that there was a plan and the construction which has been put up is as per the sanction plan.

4. Earlier a submission had been made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the plan was in the bank of the petitioner and will be produced.

5. Today a submission is made that the plan was with respondents No.3 and 4 and as such the same could not be produced.

6. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that;

6.1. By relying on the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioner on 22.03.2010 at Annexure-C, more particularly Schedule is that the petitioner had purchased the first floor measuring 500 sq.ft., and the second floor having a constructed area of 200 sq.ft., and there was already a construction in the said property when the petitioner had purchased the same.

6.2. His submission is that an application has also been made now under Sub-section (7) of Section 230 of the KMC Act, 1976 for grant of plan sanction, even if it were to be as