Disposed

M/S Mangala Builders Private Ltd. v. Mangalore City Corporation

Karnataka HC9 Feb 2022WP/667/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka directed the Mangalore City Corporation to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01.12.2021 regarding obstruction to building demolition and pass an order within four weeks under Section 322(2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 1 to consider the representation dated 01.12.2021 and pass an order under Section 322(2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 within 4 weeks.

M/S Mangala Builders Private Ltd. Vs Mangalore City… — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.667 OF 2022 (LB-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S MANGALA BUILDERS PRIVATE LTD., A REGISTERED COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI CHANDRAKANTH SANU S/O LATE PURUSHOTHAM SANU AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, O/AT DOOR NO.4-9-776 'SANU PALACE', MANGALORE-575003, SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFITS NOT TO BE CLAIMED). ...PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI HARISH KUMAR M.S, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

MANGALORE CITY CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER M G ROAD MANGALORE-575003.

¶12

SMT INDUMATHI

¶13

W/O LATE DR SURESH K MANNAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/O SHIVANI, GEORGE MARTIS ROAD KADRI MALLIKATTA,

¶14

¶15

MANGALORE-575002. …RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI HARISH BHANDARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶17

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NO.1 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-G DATED 01.12.2021 FORTHWITH AND TO DEMOLISH THE BUILDING IN QUESTION.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The first respondent by letter dated 28.10.2021 permitted

¶22

the petitioner to demolish the property bearing T.S.No.199 1F belonging to the petitioner.

¶23

Petitioner's grievance is that though permission is granted by respondent No.1-Corporation, the demolition of the building in question could not be carried out, since respondent No.2 and other persons are coming in the way of demolition of the building in question. Hence, the petitioner represented with the respondent No.1-Corporation to take action against respondent No.2 and all other persons who are coming in the way for demolition of the building in question. Petitioner

¶24

¶25

grievance is that, representation submitted by him with the respondent-Corporation is not considered even to this day.

¶26

The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that the representation dated 1.12.2021 submitted by the petitioner will be considered in accordance with sub-Section 2 of Section 322 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1976.

¶27

Therefore, it is expedient to dispose of the writ petition by directing respondent No.1 to consider the representation dated 1.12.2021 submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure-G and pass an appropriate order in accordance with Section 322(2) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶28

Sd/JUDGE

¶29

M/S Mangala Builders Private Ltd. v. Mangalore City Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Mangala Builders Private Ltd. v. Mangalore City Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Leela Vs State by

K Srinivasan Vs K Manjula Munibachappa

Jayalakshmamma Vs Rathnamma

Sri K B Eshwaraprasad Vs the State of Karnataka

Indiranagar Club Vs the Commissioner

Sri G Venkatesh Vs the Commissioner