Dismissed¶42

Shri Varnit Jain v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Jan 2026WP/3390/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Karnataka High Court, Bengaluru | WP No. 3390 of 2019 (LB-BMP) | Justice Suraj Govindaraj | Decided 08-01-2026 | Petitioner Varnit Jain v. State of Karnataka, BBMP and others | Challenge to BBMP demand notice No. 53540 (Rs. 1,85,022/-) for Unit No. 1/136, Carlton Towers, Old Airport Road, Kodihalli | Certiorari/mandamus under Articles 226 and 227 | Petition withdrawn by counsel's memo and dismissed as infructuous — no merits adjudicated; citable, if at all, only for the procedural fact of dismissal as infructuous.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shri Varnit Jain Vs the State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:1010 WP No. 3390 of 2019

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3390 OF 2019 (LB-BMP)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SHRI. VARNIT JAIN S/O ANURAG JAIN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO. 24, CUBBON ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SRIHARI A.V, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

¶14

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA

¶15

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶16

THE BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, CORPORATION CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶17

THE JOINT DIRECTOR TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶18

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE NARASIMHARAJA SQUARE,

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:1010 WP No. 3390 of 2019

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶22

THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGAR PALIKE NARASIMHARAJA SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶23

THE PRESIDENT CARLTON TOWERS AND ASSOCIATION CARLTON TOWERS, OLD AIRPORT ROAD KODIHALLI BENGALURU - 562 119.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. SPOORTHI V, HCGP FOR R1)

¶26

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTUTION PRAYING TO QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE BEARING NO.53540 DATED 22.04.2018 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,85,022/- IN RESPECT OF UNIT NO.1/136, OF CARLTON TOWERS, OLD AIRPORT ROAD, KODIHALLI, ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS VIDE ANNEXUREN AND ETC.,

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following

¶31

reliefs:

¶32

(a) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the Demand Notice bearing Nos. 53540, dated 22.01.2018 for an amount of Rs. 1,85,022/ in respect of Unit No. 1/136, of Carlton Towers, Old

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:1010 WP No. 3390 of 2019

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

Airport Road, Kodihalli, issued by the Respondents vide ANNEXURE-M;

¶36

(b) Alternatively issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to consider the reply given by the Petitioner dated 31.07.2018 vide Annexure-N to the Demand Notice issued by the Respondent No.5 dated 22.01.2018 at Annexure-M;

¶37

(c) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo, seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the writ

¶39

petition. The said memo reads as follows:

¶40

"In the aforementioned case, the petitioner submits that the case has become infructuous due to subsequent development and no further orders survive for consideration from this Hon'ble Court. Hence, I request this Hon'ble Court to dispose the case as infructuous."

¶41

Accepting the said memo and the submission of the

¶42

learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is dismissed as infructuous.

¶43

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶44

GJM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Shri Varnit Jain v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shri Varnit Jain v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K K Aiyappa Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. P. Babulal Vs the Chief Commissioner

Sri Narayanappa Gowda Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Hajimastan Vs State by

Smt. Vidya Vs the Commissioner

Smt. Susheela Vs State of Karnataka