Bumax Properties Llp v. State of Karnataka

NC:(2026:KHC:4769-DB( WA(No.(145(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( (

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

THDATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 145 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:

1. BUMAX PROPERTIES LLP

A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP UNDER THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ACT 2009

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 427, 80 FEET ROAD 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA

BENGALURU 560 095 REPRSENTED BY IS PARTNER SRI R DINESH Digitally signedtiby

¶2MR. R DINESH NIRMALA DEVI S/O MR. RAMACHANDRA Location: AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS HIGH0COURT NO. 427, 80 FEET ROD OF 6TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA KARNATAKA BENGALURU 560 095

…APPELLANTS (BY SRI. ARJUN RAO, ADVOCATE)

AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA THROUGH THE TEHSILDAR NC:(2026:KHC:4769-DB( WA(No.(145(of(2025( ( , ,,HC-KAR( ( ( BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL), YELAHANKA TALUK TALUK OFFICE MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA YELAHANKA 560 064

¶2TAHSILAR BENGAURU NORTH (ADITIONAL) YELAHANKA TALUK TALUK OFFICE MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA YELAHANKA 560 054

¶3DEPUTY TAHSILAR BENGALURU NORTH (ADDITIONAL) YELAHANKA TALUK TALUK OFFICE MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA YELAHANKA 560 054

¶4VILLAGE ACCOUNTANT HUNASEMARANAHALLI VILLAGE YELAHANKA TALUK 560 054

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.S. HARISH, GA)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT 1961, R/W RULE 27 OF THE WRIT PROCEEDINGS RULES, 1977 PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN WP No-2406/2021 (GM-RES), SET ASIDE JUDGMENT DATED 20.01.2025 IN WP NO-2406/2021 AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶1The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 20.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.2406/2021 [GM-RES]. By the impugned order, the said petition was dismissed. It is pertinent to note that the appellants had filed the writ petition inter alia praying as under: A. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to follow the due process of law and issue notice to the Petitioners prior to taking any coercive action and/or

conducting proceedings against the Petitioners, if any, with respect to the Schedule Property; B. Pass any such further orders as may be deemed just and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

¶2In the said writ petition, petitioner No.1 claimed that it is the absolute owner and in exclusive possession of an immovable property falling in Survey No.194/5 and 194/5B,

Hunasemaranahalli, Jala Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore District (now Yalahanka Additional Taluk, Bengaluru North) measuring 3 acres and 20 guntas [subject property].

¶3It is stated that the subject property was purchased by the appellant No.1 (then known as Bumax Properties Pvt. Ltd.,) in an auction conducted by Indian Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [SARFAESI Act]. Appellant No.1 stated that on 29.01.2021, one of its employees visited the Taluk Office in Yalahanka and was informed of the allegation that the appellant No.1 had encroached lands forming part of Hunasemaranahalli Lake and would be evicted from the portion of the subject property. Appellant No.1 claims that its employees requested for a formal show cause notice and also requested for a personal hearing. But neither a notice was issued nor any hearing was afforded to the appellant.

¶4The appellants claim that the subject land was bounded by a stone compound wall, which is over 50 years old. It is the appellants' grievance that the respondent - authorities without

issuing any show cause notice had taken the drastic step of demolishing a part of the compound wall.

¶5The learned Single Judge had declined to entertain the writ petition on the ground that it involved disputed questions of fact and it was not appropriate to examine the same in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶6The learned AGA appearing for the respondents submits that the action was taken after the survey of the subject land had been conducted and it was ascertained that the lake was encroached. He states notwithstanding the survey conducted earlier to obviate any further allegations of non compliance with the principles of natural justice, the concerned authorities will conduct a fresh joint survey on 10.02.2026. Appellant No.1/its representative should be present at site to participate in the proceedings. After the joint survey, markers would be put which according to the authorities will demarcate the portion of land that falls within the boundaries of the lake in question. The appellants are thereafter free to take steps for the protection of the remaining land as they deem fit. In the event, the appellants

dispute the decision of the respondent-authority regarding the boundaries of the land, the appellants are at liberty to take steps in accordance with law. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

BS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 9