IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2017 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHERJEE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NOS.3793 TO 3794 OF 2016 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN:
1. SAMBEGOWDA S/O LATE NINGEGOWDA AGE: 78 YEARS R/A NO.351, II MAIN MANCEGOWDANAKOPPLU VIJAYNAGAR POST MYSORE CITY AND DISTRICT – 570 017 2. NAGARAJU S/O LATE BANDIGOWDA AGE: 47 YEARS R/A NO.349, II MAIN MANCEGOWDANAKOPPLU VIJAYNAGAR POST MYSORE CITY AND DISTRICT – 570 017 ... APPELLANTS (BY MR.RAGHAVENDRA KATTIMANI M., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD ZONAL OFFICE, K.R.S.ROAD METAGALLI, MYSORE – 570 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER 2. M/s. CHAMUNDESHWARI INDUSTRIES PROPRIETOR R.RAVI AGE: 47 YEARS NO.333, MANCHEGOWDA KOPPAL MARIGUDI BEEDI VIJAYANAGARA POST MYSORE – 17 ... RESPONDENTS (MR.H.C.SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R2) ---
These Writ Appeals are filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, praying to set aside the order passed in W.P.Nos.877-878 of 2015 dated 12.7.2016.
These appeals coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, THE CHIEF JUSTICE delivered the following:
JUDGMENT The writ appeals are barred by limitation.
2. These are appeals against the judgment and order dated July 12, 2016, passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge.
3. The writ petitioners are adjacent owners of the plot of land allotted in favour of the respondent No.2. The writ petitioners requested for the allotment of the said land, but the authorities have allotted the land in favour of the respondent No.2.
4. It is contended that free ingress and egress of the writ petitioners would be affected by such allotment in favour of the respondent No.2.
5. There has been a local inspection, which revealed that there has been an approach road earmarked and left out by the respondent No.2, which could be used for ingress and egress of the writ petitioners.
6. We do not find any merit in the writ appeals.
7. The application for condonation of delay stands dismissed. Consequently, the writ appeals are, also dismissed.
8. All the pending interlocutory applications do not survive for consideration and are, accordingly, dismissed.
9. There will be no order as to costs.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE RV