Dismissed¶46

Sri. Ramachandraiah C v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC25 Jun 2026WP/19274/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-Judge (Hon'ble Mr. Justice E.S. Indiresh) oral order dated 25-06-2026 dismissing WP No. 19274 of 2026 (KLR-RES). Keywords: road formation through private land; Article 226/227 writ; disputed questions of fact; parallel pending civil suit O.S. No. 343/2025 (permanent injunction, declaration); restraint on exercising writ jurisdiction; liberty to pursue civil suit remedies; Tumakuru; State of Karnataka and revenue authorities (Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Tahsildar). No precedents cited; no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

None substantive; liberty reserved to the petitioners to pursue the remedies available in the pending civil suit (O.S. No. 343/2025) in accordance with law. ¶46

Sri. Ramachandraiah C Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:31818 WP No. 19274 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.19274 OF 2026 (KLR-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI. RAMACHANDRAIAH C. SO LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

¶10

SMT. RAJESHWARI D.K. W/O LATE SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS.

¶11

SMT. LAKSHMIDEVAMMA W/O LATE THIMMAIAH @ THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.

¶12

Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI. THIMMEGOWDA. C S/O LATE CHIKKANNA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,

¶14

ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF CHOLAPURA VILLAGE, KEMBALALU POST, HEBBURU HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. GIRISH M.K., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:31818 WP No. 19274 of 2026

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR.B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU -560 001.

¶23

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMAKURU DISTRICT, TUMAKURU-572 101.

¶24

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER TUMAKURU SUB-DIVISION, TUMAKURU-572 101.

¶25

THE TAHSILDAR TUMAKURU TALUK, TUMAKURU -572 101.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS

¶27

(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP )

¶28

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO NOT TO FORM A ROAD DIAGONALLY DISSECTING THE LAND OF THE PETITIONERS WHICH ARE DETAILED IN THE SCHEDULE BELOW.

¶29

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶30

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:31818 WP No. 19274 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

ORAL ORDER

¶34

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent-State.

¶35

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

¶36

parties.

¶37

The grievance of the petitioners in the

¶38

present writ petition is that respondent No. 2 is attempting to form a road through the petitioner's property, the details of which are described in the schedule appended to the writ petition.

¶39

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and upon perusal of the writ papers, it is evident that the petitioners have already instituted a suit in O.S. No. 343/2025, pending on the file of the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC, Tumakuru, seeking the relief of permanent injunction,

¶40

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:31818 WP No. 19274 of 2026

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

declaration and consequential reliefs in respect of the

¶43

very same property.

¶44

Since the subject matter of the present writ petition is directly and substantially in issue in the said civil suit and the controversy involves disputed questions of fact, which are required to be adjudicated on the basis of evidence and as such this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶45

Accordingly, the writ petition stands

¶46

dismissed , reserving liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedies available in the pending civil suit, in accordance with law.

¶47

SD/(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶48

SB:List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1

Sri. Ramachandraiah C v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ramachandraiah C v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Saroja Vs the Manager

Smt Saraswathamma Vs State of Karnataka

Smt B S Vijayaprabha Vs the State of Karnataka

Shekharappa Vs Deputy Commissioner

Sri. Kantharaju. a. N. Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Munimarappa Vs the State of Karnataka