Dismissed¶53

Sadhashiva Bhat v. Suresh Bhat

Karnataka HC10 Feb 2026WA/1145/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court Division Bench (D K Singh & S Rachaiah JJ) dismisses writ appeal WA No. 1145 of 2025 (LB-RES) under S.4 Karnataka High Court Act against Single Judge order dated 11.02.2025 in W.P.No.36429/2024 directing Uppunda Grama Panchayath PDO to issue no objection certificate for electricity connection and assign door number to petitioner's building; appellant (I.A.No.1/2025 applicant, brother of writ petitioner, asserting rival title/share in the site) told to pursue right and title in appropriate civil proceedings; NOC does not confer title; no scope for interference; pending applications disposed.

What did the court decide?

The appellant's claim to assert his right and title over the land has to be decided in appropriate civil proceedings, if the appellant wants to initiate such proceedings. ¶53

Sadhashiva Bhat Vs Suresh Bhat — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶53

Issue for consideration

Whether the Division Bench should interfere with the learned Single Judge's judgment/order dated 11.02.2025 in W.P.No.36429/2024 (directing issuance of no objection certificate and assignment of door number), in view of the appellant's claim of right and title over the land.

¶53

Court's answer

The appellant's claim to assert his right and title over the land has to be decided in appropriate civil proceedings, if the appellant wants to initiate such proceedings.

¶53

Ratio / Principle

There is no scope to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, and accordingly the writ appeal is dismissed.

¶53

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Division Bench (D K Singh and S Rachaiah, JJ.), by oral judgment delivered on 10.02.2026 in Writ Appeal No. 1145 of 2025 (LB-RES) filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, dismissed the intra-court appeal preferred by Sadhashiva Bhat against the judgment and order dated 11.02.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.36429/2024 (LB-RES). The Single Judge had rejected I.A.No.1/2025 filed by the applicant (the appellant, brother of the writ petitioner) and had directed the Panchayath Development Officer, Uppunda Grama Panchayath to issue a no objection certificate enabling the writ petitioner to obtain an electricity connection and to assign a door number to the building constructed by him, clarifying that the grant of the no objection certificate would not imply acceptance of the petitioner's title, which remained subject to the result of any litigation. Neither the Electricity Department nor the Panchayath challenged the impugned order. The Division Bench held that the appellant's claim to assert his right and title over the land has to be decided in appropriate civil proceedings if he chooses to initiate them, found no scope to interfere with the impugned judgment and order, and dismissed the writ appeal; all pending applications stood disposed of.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:7859-DB WA No. 1145 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 1145 OF 2025 (LB-RES)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SADHASHIVA BHAT

¶11

SON OF LATE. MADHAVA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS

¶12

RESIDING AT NO. 3/109A AMBHAGILU UPPUNDA VILLAGE, BYNDUR TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT -576 232

¶13

…APPELLANT

¶14

(BY SRI. SHRIDHAR PRABHU., ADVOCATE)

¶15

Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

AND:

¶17

SURESH BHAT

¶18

SON OF LATE MADHAVA BHAT, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT 3-105A, AMBHAGILU, UPPUNDA VILLAGE, BYNDOOR TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT -576232.

¶19

PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER UPPUNDA GRAMA PANCHAYATH UPPUNDA VILLAGE, BYNDOOR TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT 576232

¶20

¶21

NC: 2026:KHC:7859-DB WA No. 1145 of 2025

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MESCOM, BYNDOOR CITY, BYNDOOR TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT-576214

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. K CHANDRANATH ARIGA., ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶26

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS OF THE WRIT PETITION No. 36429/2024 (LB-RES) AND SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11TH FEBRUARY 2025 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION. No. 36429/2024 (LB-RES), ETC.

¶27

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶31

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.36429/2024.

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:7859-DB WA No. 1145 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

The parties are referred to as per their ranking

¶35

before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

¶36

The petitioner had filed this writ petition praying for writ of mandamus commanding the Panchayath Development Officer, Uppunda Grama Panchayath to issue no objection certificate to the petitioner for electricity supply and assign door number to the building of the petitioner shown in the schedule.

¶37

The learned Single Judge having considered the facts, has rejected the application I.A.No.1/2025 filed by the applicant on the ground that if the applicant has any right over the property in question, he can initiate appropriate proceedings to secure his right over the property in question and if the site on which the petitioner had constructed the building gets allotted to the share of

¶38

the applicant, who is none other than the brother of the petitioner, he would be entitled to utilize the same.

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:7859-DB WA No. 1145 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

The brother of the petitioner is appellant before

¶42

this Court. Neither the Electricity Department nor the Panchayath have approached this Court being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, therefore, considering the fact that it is the Panchayath who had granted the building licence to the petitioner to put up construction and therefore, the Panchayath would have to grant no objection certificate to the petitioner to enable him to secure electricity connection and assign a door number to the building. It has been however made clear that if the construction of the building in question is found

¶43

to be contrary to any law, it would be open to the Panchayath to initiate action against the petitioner, but so long as the building licence was granted to the petitioner by the Panchayath, the petitioner could not be denied of his right to secure electricity connection.

¶44

In view of the aforesaid, the Panchayath has

¶45

been directed to issue no objection certificate to the

¶46

¶47

NC: 2026:KHC:7859-DB WA No. 1145 of 2025

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

petitioner to enable him to secure electricity connection and the Panchayath has also been directed to assign door number to the building constructed by the petitioner.

¶50

The learned Single Judge in the impugned order

¶51

has made it clear that the grant of no objection certificate and assigning the number to the building constructed by the petitioner would not lead to an inference that the Panchayath has accepted the tiltle of the petitioner and the same would be subject to the result of any litigation that may ensue.

¶52

Considering the judgment, we do not think the

¶53

appellant should have any grievance inasmuch as his claim to assert his right and title over the land has to be decided in appropriate civil proceedings, if the appellant wants to initiate. We, therefore, do not find any scope to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed .

¶54

¶55

NC: 2026:KHC:7859-DB WA No. 1145 of 2025

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

All pending applications stands disposed of.

¶58

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶59

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶60