Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Sri Pabba Reddy Kodandarami Reddy, filed a writ appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act challenging an order dated 29.11.2022 passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.19574/2022. The Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition with observations that the petitioner cannot be granted the relief sought, and directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation. The appellant sought to set aside that order and to grant consequential relief of injunction against the first respondent, M/s Upkar Residences Pvt Ltd, their agents, or anyone claiming through them, from interfering with the peaceful possession and occupation of the layout, more particularly the southern portion of Sy.No.532. The Division Bench, comprising the Chief Justice and Justice Krishna S Dixit, heard the appeal. The court noted that the appellant had not established his possession or ownership over the disputed property. The Single Judge had already directed the authorities to consider the appellant's representation, and the Division Bench found no reason to interfere with that order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The court did not award any costs.
Headnote
A) Land Law - Possession and Ownership - Injunction - Appellant sought injunction against first respondent from interfering with possession of southern portion of Sy.No.532 - Single Judge disposed of writ petition with direction to consider representation - Division Bench held that appellant failed to establish possession and ownership, and no case for interference made out - Appeal dismissed (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to an injunction against the first respondent from interfering with the peaceful possession and occupation of the southern portion of Sy.No.532.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Intra-court appeal
- Writ appeal
- Land dispute
- Layout development
- Possession
- Ownership
- Representation
- Consideration
- Karnataka High Court Act Section 4
Case Details
2023 LawText (KAR) (11) 32
WA No. 61 of 2023 (LB-RES)
Prasanna B. Varale, Chief Justice, Krishna S Dixit, Justice
Sri Sadananda G. Shastri for appellant, Smt. Leela P. Devadiga for caveator/respondent 1
Sri Pabba Reddy Kodandarami Reddy
M/s Upkar Residences Pvt Ltd, The State Government of Karnataka Urban Development Department, The Commissioner Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development Authority (BMRDA), The Member Secretary Satellite Town Ring Road Planning Authority
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Intra-court appeal against a Single Judge's order in a writ petition concerning land dispute and injunction.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought to set aside the Single Judge's order and to grant injunction against the first respondent from interfering with possession of southern portion of Sy.No.532.
Filing Reason
Appellant claimed possession and ownership of the southern portion of Sy.No.532 and alleged interference by the first respondent.
Previous Decisions
Single Judge disposed of W.P.No.19574/2022 on 29.11.2022 with observations that the petitioner cannot be granted relief and directed consideration of representation.
Issues
Whether the appellant is entitled to an injunction against the first respondent from interfering with the peaceful possession and occupation of the southern portion of Sy.No.532.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that he is in possession and ownership of the southern portion of Sy.No.532 and sought injunction against the first respondent.
First respondent opposed the appeal, contending that the appellant has no right over the property.
Ratio Decidendi
The appellant failed to establish possession and ownership over the disputed property; the Single Judge's order directing consideration of representation was appropriate and no interference is warranted.
Judgment Excerpts
This intra-court appeal seeks to lay a challenge to a learned Single Judge's order dated 29.11.2022 whereby the first respondent’s W.P.No.19754/2022 came to be disposed off with the observations that the petitioner cannot be granted the relief sought.
The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Procedural History
The appellant filed W.P.No.19574/2022 before the High Court of Karnataka, which was disposed of by a Single Judge on 29.11.2022. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the present intra-court appeal under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act.
Acts & Sections
- Karnataka High Court Act: Section 4
