SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 13817

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ANU SIVARAMAN AND VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
SRI R VENKATA RAJU – Appellant
Versus
JAYARAM.N – Respondent
CCC 811/2024



HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.945/2024 (LA-BDA)

C/W CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO.811/2024 IN W.A. No.945/2024:

BETWEEN:

1. THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST BANGALORE - 560020 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

Digitally signed 2. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER by ARSHIFA BANGALORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT BAHAR KHANAM BANGALORE - 560020.

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MURUGESH V. CHARATI, ADV.,)

AND:

1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

HC-KAR

2. SRI. R. VENKATA RAJU S/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS. 3. SRI. R. RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. 4. SRI. R. MANJUNATH S/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

5. SMT. INDRANI W/O SRINIVAS REDDY D/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.

6. SMT. RADHAMMA W/O RAMACHANDRA REDDY D/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.

7. SMT. RENUKAMMA W/O SUBBA REDDY D/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.

RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT THALAGHATTAPURA VILLAGE KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU - 560062.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R1 SRI. UDAYA HOLLA, SR. ADV., FOR SRI. K.S. MALLIKARJUNAIAH, ADV., FOR R2 TO R7)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 28/02/2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE LEARNED SINGLE HC-KAR JUDGE IN WP NO.4934/2021 AND ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL BY DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION & ETC.

IN C.C.C. NO.811/2024:

BETWEEN:

1. SRI. R. VENKATA RAJU S/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS. 2. SRI. R. RAVIKUMAR S/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS. 3. SRI. R. MANJUNATH S/O LATE RAMA REDDY AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.

ALL ARE RESIDING AT THALAGHATTAPURA VILLAGE KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD BENGALURU 560062.

...COMPLAINANTS (BY SRI. UDAYA HOLLA, SR. ADV., FOR SRI. K.S. MALLIKARJUNAIAH, ADV.,)

AND:

1. JAYARAM .N COMMISSIONER THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KUMARA PARK WEST BENGALURU-560 020. 2. MANJUNATH .M.N THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BENGALURU-560 020.

HC-KAR ...ACCUSED (BY SRI. MURUGESH V. CHARATI, ADV., FOR A1 SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR A2)

THIS CCC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971, PRAYING TO INITIATE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE ACCUSED FOR WILLFUL OPEN DEFIANCE AND DELIBERATE VIOLATION OF THE ORDER DATED 28.02.2024 IN W.P.NO.4934/2021 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT VIDE ANNEXURE - A & ETC.

THIS WRIT APPEAL CONNECTED WITH C.C.C. HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 16.02.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A.

PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This appeal is filed by the appellants under Section 4 of the High Court of Karnataka Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.4934/2021 (LA-BDA).

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that respondent Nos.2 to 6 filed the writ HC-KAR petition challenging the order dated 16.07.2018 at Annexure-K passed by respondent No.1, sought to issue writ in the nature of certiorari to quash preliminary notification and final notifications dated 07.11.2002 and 09.09.2003 respectively. The appellant-Bengaluru Development Authority ('BDA') filed detailed objections to the writ petition and sought for dismissal on various grounds. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by directing the appellant-BDA to restore the possession of the land in Sy.No.16/1 measuring 34 guntas of Thalaghattapura village in favour of the original petitioners. It was further directed that the possession is to be restored only if the petitioners have not withdrawn the compensation amount said to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top