IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.ABHAY S. OKA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL NO.2276 OF 2019 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
MR.THIRUPATHI REDDY MANDALA S/O MR.NARASIMHA REDDY MANDALA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.84, 5TH CROSS 8TH MAIN, HOYSALANAGAR R.M.NAGAR BANGALORE – 560 016 REPRESENTED BY ITS GPA HOLDER MR.RAMA TIRUVENGALAM TALLURI S/O MR.HANUMANJEETALLURI AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO.5-5-33/37A VIGNANPURI COLONY KUKATPALLY, HYDERABAD ANDHRA PRADESH – 560 072 ... APPELLANT (BY SHRI SUNIL KUMAR H, ADVOCATE - ABSENT) AND:
1. THE COMMISSIONER BBMP, HEAD OFFICE HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE – 560 002 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER BBMP, HORAMAVU SUB-DIVISION MAHADEVAPURA ZONE JAYANTHINAGAR CIRCLE OLD PREMISES OF HORAMAVU PANCHYATH BUILDING BANGALORE – 560 113 3. SRI MURALI KRISHNA NAIDU S/O LATE RAMASWAMY NAIDU AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 4. SMT. RUBY MURALI W/O MURALI KRISHNA NAIDU AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT J.S.SPLENDOR 103, 1ST FLOOR, 8TH CROSS MUNINANJAPPA LAYOUT RAMAMURTHYNAGAR BANGALORE – 560 043 ... RESPONDENTS ---
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.No.18462/2018 DATED 05.09.2018 AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT None appeared in the morning session. Even in the afternoon session, none appeared.
2. We have perused the impugned order. By the impugned order, a limited ad-interim relief has been granted pending service of notice to the appellant, who is the third respondent in the writ petition. The limited order passed by the learned Single Judge directs the second respondent to ensure that no further illegal construction is continued by the appellant. If the appellant is lawfully carrying on construction after obtaining the requisite permissions, the appellant can always move the learned Single Judge for vacating the ad-interim relief. Therefore, there is no reason to interfere in the appeal.
The appeal is disposed of subject to the observations made above.
Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE AHB