IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1692 OF 2025 (EXCISE)

BETWEEN:

1. M/S. KUMAR ENTERPRISES A PARTNERSHIP FIRM NO.343, 9^TH MAIN SECTOR - VII, H.S.R. LAYOUT BANGALORE - 560 102 REP. BY ITS PARTNER BHARATH S. KUMAR …APPELLANT (BY SRI G.K. BHAT, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SMT. SUDHA D., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally

1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE signed by SRIDEVI S GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA Location: 2^ND FLOOR, BMTC TTMC BUILDING High Court 'A' BLOCK, SHANTINAGAR of Karnataka BENGALURU - 560 027

2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT (BUD-5)

BENGALURU - 560 002

3. H.S. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O H.B.S. NAIK AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS R/AT NO. 203, OM SAI, SAPPHIRE APARTMENT GOVINDAPPA LANE, 5^TH CROSS KODIHALLI BENGALURU - 560 008 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., AGA FOR R-1 & 2; SRI ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W SRI ANOOP HARANAHALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R-3)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 12.09.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P. No.9258/2025 (EXCISE) AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA C.A.V. JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The appellant, a partnership firm, has filed the present intra- court appeal impugning an order dated 12.09.2025 [the impugned order], passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.9258/2024 (EXCISE). Respondent No.3 [the licensee had filed the said petition assailing the order dated 21.03.2024 passed by Respondent No.1 [the Commissioner] dismissing an appeal against the order dated 07.12.2021 passed by Respondent No. 2 [the Deputy Commissioner]. The Deputy Commissioner rejected the licensee's request to withdraw his application to transfer his licences. Aggrieved by the same, the licensee had appealed to the Commissioner.

PREFATORY FACTS

2. The licensee was granted a licence in Form CL-9 for the sale of Indian liquor (other than Arrack), foreign liquor, or both, to be consumed on the premises, combined with meals and refreshments in the refreshment rooms (Bars), at the given address.

3. The licensee was also granted a licence for retail vend of beer at the given premises [RVB licence]. The CL-9 licence was attached to the RVB licence. The said licences are hereinafter collectively referred to as “the licences”.

4. On 18.05.2020, the licensee agreed to transfer the licences in favour of the appellant for a total consideration of `2,75,00,000/-, in terms of a memorandum of understanding [the MoU] executed on that date.

5. The appellant states that the entire consideration of `2,75,00,000/- was paid to the licensee and on receipt of the said consideration, the licensee filed an application before the Deputy Commissioner for transfer of the licences in favour of the appellant under Rule 17B of the Karnataka Excise Licences (General Conditions of Licences) Rules,1967 [the Rules].

6. On 02.09.2020, the licensee filed a complaint with Indiranagar Police Station alleging that the appellant had not paid the balance consideration for the transfer of the licences after obtaining his signature on the application for transfer of the licences. Thereafter, on 21.09.2020, the wife and children of the licensee filed a representation before the Commissioner, praying that the sanction for transfer of the licences be deferred. She alleged that the partners of the appellant had obtained the licensee's signature on the application for transfer of the licences under coercion. She also claimed that her husband, the licencee, had signed the same witho