In this appeal against an order dismissing a prior filing under Section 9 of the Karnataka Public Premises Act, 1974, the High Court held the present appeal was not maintainable but reserved liberty to file a fresh petition.
Liberty granted to file a fresh petition challenging the impugned order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
MSA No.86 OF 2022
BETWEEN :
AMJAD KHAN S/O GHOUSE KHAN AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS SHOP NO.27/11, S.C.ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR, RESIDING AT OLD NO.1, NEW NO.31, GAYATHRI TEMPLE STREET, YESHWANTHPUR, BENGALURU - 560 022.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MOHAMAD AYUB ALI, ADVOCATE)
AND :
2
REPRESENTED BY ITS OFFICER COMPETENT OFFICER
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RIYAZ AHMED SHAREEF, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 (CP 11571/2022))
THIS MSA FILED UNDER SECTION 10 OF KARNATAKA PUBLIC PREMISES. (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANT) 1974 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 25.07.2022 PASSED IN MA No.30/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 9 OF KARNATAKA PUBLIC PREMISES. (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORIZED OCCUPANTS) 1974.
THIS MSA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Appeal is dismissed as not maintainable reserving liberty to the appellant to file a petition afresh challenging the order impugned herein.
Registry to return the certified copy of the documents produced along with the memorandum of
3
appeal to the learned counsel for the appellant by replacing the same with photocopies.
Sd/- JUDGE
RKA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal filed under Section 10 of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupant) Act, 1974 is maintainable.
Whether the appellant should be granted liberty to file a fresh petition challenging the impugned order.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
AMJAD KHAN
SRI. MAHBOOD SHARIFF EDUCATION TRUST
THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER KARNATAKA PUBLIC PREMISES ACT 1974
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
