Dismissed¶37

Smt. Ambuja G v. Bangalore Central City Corporation.

Karnataka HC23 Feb 2026WP/4968/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Infructuous dismissal of writ petition (Article 226, LB-TAX) challenging proclamation and written Notice of Sale of Immovable Property dated 30.01.2026, Ref. No. RO(CVR)W113/JAN/2025-26/PRC 003836, issued by the Revenue Officer, C.V. Raman Nagar Division, Bengaluru Central City Corporation; petitioners Ambuja G and D. S. Guru Shankar; Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited third respondent. Counsel's memo dated 20.02.2026 recorded withdrawal of the impugned notices; petition dismissed as infructuous by Suraj Govindaraj, J. on 23 February 2026. Keywords: writ petition dismissed as infructuous; withdrawal of sale notice/proclamation; property tax (LB-TAX); no merits decided; NC: 2026:KHC:11217.

What did the court decide?

The Court accepted the memo dated 20.02.2026 and the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners. ¶36

Smt. Ambuja G Vs Bangalore Central City Corporation. — Company and Corporate | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - NC: 2026:KHC:11217 WP No. 4968 of 2026

¶2

HC-KAR

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 4968 OF 2026 (LB-TAX)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. AMBUJA G W/O SRI D. S. GURU SHANKAR, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO. 238, 4^TH MAIN, 6^TH CROSS, NGEF LAYOUT, SADANANDANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 038.

¶9

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

SRI D. S. GURU SHANKAR, S/O LATE DR. SRINIVAS REDDY. AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.238, 4^TH MAIN, 6^TH CROSS, NGEF LAYOUT, SADANANDANAGAR, BENGALURU 560 038.

¶11

(BY SRI. BHARGAVA D BHAT, ADVOCATE)

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

AND:

¶14

BANGALORE CENTRAL CITY CORPORATION, OFFICE AT HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA- 560 002, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER.

¶15

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:11217 WP No. 4968 of 2026

¶16

HC-KAR

¶17

THE REVENUE OFFICER, C.V. RAMAN NAGAR DIVISION, BENGALURU CENTRAL CITY CORPORATION, BENGALURU-560 093.

¶18

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956, OFFICE AT - NO. 17, JAMSHEDJI TATA ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI B. PROMOD, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶21

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCLAMATION AND WRITTEN NOTICE OF SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY DATED. 30.01.2026 BEARING REF.NO. RO(CVR)W113/JAN/2025-26/PRC 003836 ISSUED BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioners are before this Court seeking for the

¶26

following reliefs:-

¶27

i. "Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the proclamation and written Notice of Sale of Immovable Property dated 30.01.2026 bearing Ref No. RO(CVR)W113/JAN/2025-

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:11217 WP No. 4968 of 2026

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

26/PRC 003836 issued by the 2^nd respondent, (Annexure A);

¶31

ii. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing the proclamation and written Notice of Sale of Immovable property dated 30.01.2026 bearing Ref. No. RO(CVR)W113/JAN/202526/PRC 003836 issed by the 2^nd respondent (AnnexureA1)

¶32

iii. Pass any other order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case."

¶33

A memo dated 20.02.2026 signed by learned counsel

¶34

for the petitioners is filed, which reads as under:-

¶35

"The undersigned counsel for the Petitioners respectfully submits that, in view of the respondent authority having withdrawn the impugned notices, the present petition has been rendered infructuous. Accordingly, it is prayed that this petition may be dismissed as withdrawn, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶36

Accepting the memo and submission of learned counsel for the petitioners, the writ petition stands

¶37

dismissed as infructuous.

¶38

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶39

MH/-

Smt. Ambuja G v. Bangalore Central City Corporation.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Ambuja G v. Bangalore Central City Corporation.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G N Suresh Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Epitome Builders Pvt. Ltd., Vs the State of Karnataka

Padma Vs the Commissioner

Sri Ajay Mandira Cariappa Vs the Chief Commissioner

Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs Bangalore Central City Corporation Circle

Karnataka Education Society Vs the Chief Secretary