IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT APPEAL No.3665 OF 2019 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
HIRAN KRISHNASWAMY SON OF B.H. KRISHNASWAMY, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1214, 11TH CROSS, 24TH MAIN ROAD, SECTOR-1, HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 102.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI MALLA REDDY B.V., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE, BENGALURU – 560 002.
2. JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, NO.1, BEGUR MAIN ROAD, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU -560 068.
3. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, NO.1, BEGUR MAIN ROAD, BOMMANAHALLI, BENGALURU -560 068.
4. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, 9TH MAIN ROAD, 14TH ‘B’ CROSS, BBMP PARK, 6TH SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, BENGALURU – 560 102.
5. NAVEEN PRAKASH SON OF MR.B.PRAKASH, MAJOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AND POWER OF ATTORNEY, SRI B.PRAKASH, RESIDING AT FLAT NO.102, I FLOOR, SRI SAI NILAYA, NO.1069, 24TH MAIN ROAD, I SECTOR HSR LAYOUT, BANGALURU – 560 102.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOs.1 TO 4;
SRI PADMANABHA MAHALE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI S. VENUGOPALA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.5) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 21.08.2019 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.22568 OF 2019 BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION IN WRIT PETITION NO.22568 OF 2019 ETC., THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 21.08.2019 passed in writ petition No.22568 of 2019 by the learned Single Judge, directing the respondent-Corporation to take an action in accordance with law within a period of three months, the writ petitioner has filed the present appeal.
2. During the pendency of this writ appeal, a direction was issued to the respondent-Corporation to visit the building in question and submit a report on the status of the building. A memo along with documents is filed in the Court today. The report is also filed. The same indicates that there are certain violations in the building. As a consequence whereof, notice under Section 321(1) and (2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976, has been issued. It is for the respondent to answer the same. Suffice to hold that the request of the petitioner seeking action to be initiated against the respondent having since been satisfied, we do not find any ground to proceed further in the matter.
The appeal is disposed off accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Cs/-
CT:MJ