Karnataka High Court
Sudarshan Karle vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 September, 2022
Bench: Acting Chief Justice, S Vishwajith Shetty
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. ALOK ARADHE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. VISHWAJITH SHETTY
WRIT APPEAL NO.844 OF 2021 (KVOA)
BETWEEN:
1 . SUDARSHAN KARLE
S/O LATE L T KARLE
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/AT NO.101
7TH CROSS
3RD MAIN
RMV 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560 094
2 . SRI MAHENDRA KARLE
S/O LATE L T KARLE
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT NO. 101
7TH CROSS
3RD MAIN
RMV 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560 094
3 . M/S KARLE INFRA
PROJECTS PVT. LTD.
A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT NO.151
INDUSTRIAL SUBURB
YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU-560 022
REPRESENTED BY ITS
-2-
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
MR. SUDARSHAN KARLE
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI UDAYA HOLLA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI K SHRIHARI, ADVOCATE)
AND
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
VIDHANA SOUDHA
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BENGALURU-560 001
2 . THE TAHSILDAR
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
KANDAYA BHAVAN
BANGALORE-560 001
3 . V VENKATESH
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
4 . V MUNIRAJ
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
5 . V GOPALAKRISHNA
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
6 . V VIJAY KUMAR
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
7 . SMT. PADMAVATHI
D/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
8 . SMT. VENKATALAKSHMI
D/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
-3-
R-2 TO 7 ARE R/AT NO.152
CHANNAKESHAVA NAGARA
1ST MAIN, 4TH CROSS
NEAR YELLAMMA TEMPLE
ELECTRONIC CITY POST
BANGALORE - 560 100
9 . SRI V MAHESH
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
10 . V RAVIKUMAR
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
11 . SRI V SRINIVAS
S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
12 . SMT. AMRUTHALAKSHMI
D/O VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R-9 TO 12 ARE R/O
NAGAWARA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
BANGALORE
13 . K RAGHAVENDRA
S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
OLD NO.302, NEW NO.32
YELLAMMA TEMPLE STREET
NAGAWARA
A C POST
BANGALORE - 560 045
14 . VENKATARAMANA
S/O LATE MULUVAGALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
HOUSE NO. 194/1
OLD K E B ROAD
ARABIC COLLEGE POST
-4-
NAGAWARA
BANGALORE - 560 045
15 . R SUGUNA
W/O SRI REDDY
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT NO.140
KARTHIK NILAYA
10TH MAIN ROAD
5TH CROSS
R M EXTENSION
BANGALORE - 560 080
16 . TEJRAJ GULECHA
S/O PUKHRAJ
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
NO.132, SUPRIYA APARTMENT
6TH A CROSS
9TH MAIN
R M V EXTENSION
BANGALORE - 560 080
17 . KIRAN M NAGWAR
S/O LATE MADHAVA RAO
NAGAWARA MAIN ROAD
NAGAWARA
BANGALORE
18 . M/S CRYSTAL WEIGH BRIDGE
NO.85, NAGAWARA MAIN ROAD
NAGAWARA
BANGALORE - 560 045
REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPREITOR
MR. FARATH ULLA
19 . SRI THANKAPANDI
S/O MUTHUSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
20 . SRI SREEMURUGAN
S/O MUTHUSWAMY
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R-19 & 20 ARE R/AT
SYSTEM ALLOYS, NO.140/1
NAGAWARA
-5-
THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD
ARABIC COLLEGE POST
BANGALORE - 560 045
21 . SRI ANAND SURANA
S/O GAVERIAR CHAND SURANA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT SURANA VILLA
NO.453, FAIRFIELD LAYOUT
RACE COURSE ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 001
22 . SRI VENKATARAMANAPPA
S/O LATE HOTTE MAYANNA
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS
R/O NAGAWARA VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
BANGALORE
23 . SRI A C SRINIVAS
S/O LATE M M CHIKKAVENKATAIAH
R/AT CHOKKANAHALLI VILLAGE
YELAHANKA HOBLI
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIMA HONNAPURA, AGA FOR R-1 & 2;
SRI KRISHNA NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 TO 12 & 22;
SRI B N SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-18;
SRI A GUNASEKARAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-19 & 20;
R-13, 14, 21 & 23 -SERVED;
V/O DATED 23.03.2022, NOTICE TO R-15 & 16 IS
HELD SUFFICIENT;
V/O DATED 23.03.2022, NOTICE TO R-17 IS DISPENSED
WITH)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET
ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN WRIT PETITION
NO.5412/2021 DATED 30.03.2021 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-6-
JUDGMENT
Sri Udaya Holla, learned Senior Counsel for
Sri K.Shrihari, learned counsel for the appellants.
Smt. Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional
Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
This intra Court appeal has been filed against
an order dated 30.03.2021 passed by the learned
Single Judge by which, the appellants have been
relegated to avail of the alternative remedy under
Section 3(2) of the Karnataka Village Offices
Abolition Act, 1961.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants
submits that the learned Single Judge ought to have
appreciated that the order impugned in the writ
petition was not passed under Section 3 of the Act,
but was passed under Section 5 of the Act and
therefore, no appeal lies before the District Judge.
In support of the aforesaid submission, reliance has
been placed on a decision rendered by a learned
Single Judge of this Court in the case of PRAKASH
K. SRIVASTAVA AND ANOTHER vs THE
TAHSILDAR AND OTHERS1.
3. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the
appellants and learned Additional Government
Advocate.
4. The order dated 25.11.2020 passed by
respondent No.2 is an order passed under Section
5(4) of the Act and is not an order under Section 3 of
the Act. Therefore, no appeal lies against the
aforesaid order. The learned Single Judge, however,
has failed to appreciate the aforesaid aspect of the
matter.
5. For the aforementioned reasons, the
impugned order dated 30.03.2021 passed by the
learned Single Judge is set aside and the matter is
ILR 2006 KAR 3005
remitted to the learned Single Judge to decide the
same afresh in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
bkv
