M/S Genesis I T Innovations Private Limited Vs the… — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

M/S Genesis I T Innovations Private Limited Vs the… — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to file a copy of the order with the second respondent requesting the personal hearing; the second respondent to consider the request and pass order under Section 243(3)(e) of the GBA Act; no precipitous action until closure of the proceedings; petitioner to file certified copy within one week and proceedings to be completed within three weeks of receipt.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a personal hearing under the proviso to Section 243(3)(d) of the GBA Act in the proceedings commenced by the provisional orders dated 30.12.2025, notwithstanding the intervening suit O.S.No.25013/2026 and its rejection. +1 more

Court's answer

An opportunity of personal hearing must be extended as contemplated under the proviso to Section 243(3)(d) of the GBA Act.

Ratio / Principle

The personal hearing must be extended notwithstanding the intervening civil suit challenging the proceedings and the outcome of that suit.

Key takeaways

The petition stands disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a copy of the order with the second respondent requesting the personal hearing.ratio¶¶43
The second respondent is to consider the petitioner's request for personal hearing and then proceed to pass order under Section 243(3)(e) of the GBA Act.ratio¶¶43
The second respondent shall ensure there is no precipitous action until there is closure of the proceedings with just orders as envisaged under Section 243(3)(e) of the GBA Act.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution by M/s Genesis IT Innovations Private Limited against Provisional Orders dated 30.12.2025 bearing No. A.D.T.P/K. Z-2/P. 0/05/25-26 issued by the Additional Director of Town Planning, Zone 2, Greater Bengaluru Authority under Sections 243(3)(c) and 243(3)(d) of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024. The petitioner's suit O.S.No.25013/2026, filed contending it was carrying out only certain internal works, stood rejected on the GBA authorities' application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Holding that an opportunity of personal hearing under the proviso to Section 243(3)(d) must be extended notwithstanding the intervening suit and its outcome, the Court disposed of the petition: the petitioner may file the order with the second respondent requesting the personal hearing; the second respondent is to consider the request and pass orders under Section 243(3)(e); there shall be no precipitous action until closure of the proceedings with just orders; and timelines were fixed - certified copy to be filed within a week and proceedings completed within three weeks of receipt. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice B M Shyam Prasad (single judge); decided 22 June 2026.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30720 WP No. 18575 of 2026

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 18575 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)

BETWEEN:

M/S GENESIS I T INNOVATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO. 17, 1^ST MAIN, VASANTH NAGAR, BENGALURU- 560052.

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

REPRESENTED BY ITS, AUTHORISED SIGNATORY SRI. SUNIL KUMAR G.L, S/O LAKSHMANA GOWDA G A AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO. 5, SHIVA CHETHANA 3^RD MAIN, L.D. BLOCK, R.T. NAGAR, BANGALORE- 560032.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. MAHADESHWARAN C N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30720 WP No. 18575 of 2026

HC-KAR

N.R SQUARE,

BANGALORE-560002.

ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING, ZONE 2 GREATER BENGALURU AUTHORITY, OFFICE AT NO. 407,

4^TH FLOOR, ANNEXE BUILDING -03, N R CIRCLE, BENGALURU- 560002.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION BY PROVISIONAL ORDERS PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 DATED.30/12/2025, BEARING NO. A.D.T.P/K. Z-2/P. 0/05/25-26, UNDER SECTION 243(3) (C) AND 243 (3)(D) OF GREATER BENGALURU GOVERNANCE ACT, 2024, VIDE ANNEXURE A; B. ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION BY PROVISIONAL ORDERS PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2, DATED. 30/12/2025, BEARING NO.A.D.T.P/K.Z-2/P.0/05./25.26 UNDER SECTION 243(3) (d) OF GREATER BENGALURU GOVERNANCE ACT,2024 VIDE ANNX-B; C. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION BY DIRECTING RESPONDENT

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:30720 WP No. 18575 of 2026

HC-KAR

NO.1 TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISION CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 243(3) OF THE GREATER BENGALURU GOVERNANCE ACT, 2024. D.ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OF DIRECTION BY DIRECTING RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2, NOT TO INTERFERE OR DEMOLISH THE CONSTRUCTION PUT UP BY THE PETITIONER IN THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

ORAL ORDER

The petitioner's grievance is with the

commencement of proceedings under Section 243(3) of the Greater Bengaluru Governance Act, 2024 [for short, 'the GBA Act' ]. The petitioner is served with the Provisional Order on 30.12.2025, and the petitioner has filed an original suit against the authorities setting up a cause against commencement of such proceedings contending that the petitioner is only

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:30720 WP No. 18575 of 2026

HC-KAR

carrying out certain internal works. The petitioner's suit is in O.S.No.25013/2026 which now stands rejected with the GBA authorities filing an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The petitioner's grievance is with this outcome in the suit proceedings under Section 243 of the GBA Act will be completed without due knowledge.

Sri.C.N.Mahadeshwaran, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Pawan Kumar, a learned standing counsel for the respondents, are heard. It cannot be gainsaid that an opportunity of personal hearing must be extended as contemplated under Section 243(3)(d) proviso and that the personal hearing must be extended notwithstanding the intervening suit and the outcome therein. As such, the following:

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:30720 WP No. 18575 of 2026

HC-KAR

ORDER

[A] The petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a copy of this order with the second respondent requesting for “the personal hearing”, and the second respondent is called upon to consider the same and then proceed to pass order under Section 243 (3)(e) of the GBA Act.

[B] The second respondent shall ensure that there is no precipitous action until there is closure of proceedings with just orders as envisaged under Section 243(3)(e) of the GBA Act.

[C] The petitioner shall file a certified copy of this order with the second respondent within a week from the date of receipt thereof and the

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:30720 WP No. 18575 of 2026

HC-KAR

second respondent shall complete the proceedings within three [3] weeks from the date of receipt thereof.

Sd/-

(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

SA Ct:sr