Dismissed¶34

Smt Manasi Gajanan Modak v. the Under Secretary

Karnataka HC6 Jul 2026WP/9462/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissed as withdrawn - Karnataka HC oral order dated 06-07-2026 in WP No. 9462 of 2026 (LB-BMP) [NC: 2026:KHC:33830] before Justice B M Shyam Prasad; khata restoration and registration of property per draft sale deed dated 06/03/2026 sought via Articles 226/227 mandamus; withdrawn by petitioners' memo; no ruling on merits, no cases cited.

What did the court decide?

On the date fixed for orders, the learned counsel for the petitioners filed a memo for withdrawal of the petition; the Court accepted the memo and dismissed the petition as withdrawn. No substantive issue was decided and no relief was granted. ¶34

Smt Manasi Gajanan Modak Vs the Under Secretary — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:33830 WP No. 9462 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 9462 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. MANASI GAJANAN MODAK AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, WIFE OF SRI. PAVAN KUMAR T.V.,

¶11

SRI. PAVAN KUMAR T.V., AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, SON OF LATE T.C. VITTAL,

¶12

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO. T-1, 4TH FLOOR, SAGAR DIVINE, 3 APARTMENTS, NO.109/3, NAYANDAHALLI, PANTHRAPALYA, NEXT TO JOHN DISTILLERIES, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 039.

¶13

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. N RAGHU BABU, ADVOCATE)

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE UNDER SECRETARY TOWN PLANNING AND URBAN LAND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORY, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶18

THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER, GREATER BANGALURU AUTHORITY, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2026:KHC:33830 WP No. 9462 of 2026

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER, UTARAHALLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALLUK, WARD NO.197 OF VASANTHAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 061.

¶23

THE SUB REGISTRAR, BASAVANAGUDI DR, BASAVANAGUDI, BENGALURU - 560 004.

¶24

THE SUB REGISTRAR, BANASHANKARI, NEAR BANASHANKARI TEMPLE, BENGALURU - 560 070.

¶25

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KENCHEGOWDA, AGA FOR R1, R4 & R5; SMT. SUMANA BALIGA M., ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶26

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A), A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS 2 AND 3 TO RESTORE THE KATHA IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONERS AS IT WAS EARLIER AS PER ANNEXURE B AND FURTHER B), A WRIT OF MANDAMUS TO THE RESPONDENTS 4 AND 5 TO REGISTER THE PROPERTY AS PER THE DRAFT SALE DEED DATED 06/03/2026 AS PER ANNEXURE D AND ETC.,

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:33830 WP No. 9462 of 2026

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

ORAL ORDER

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioners files a

¶34

memo for withdrawal of the petition. The memo is accepted and the petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶35

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶36

¶37

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Smt Manasi Gajanan Modak v. the Under Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Manasi Gajanan Modak v. the Under Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Hemavathi S Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Munirathnamma Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Renukamma Vs the Commissioner

Sri. V.N. Chethan Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Venkoba Rao Shivaram, Vs the Chief Commissioner Gba

Shivanandaiah Vs Grater Bangalore