AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The appeals are barred by limitation.
However, as prayed for by Mr.A.C.Balaraj, learned advocate appearing for the appellants, we have considered the writ appeals on merits.
The writ petitioners lodged a complaint with the municipal authorities against the private respondents, who are the appellants before us, alleging that the private respondents are making certain unauthorised construction.
A notice under Section 321(3) of the Karnataka Municipal Act, 1976, was issued. The private respondents were aggrieved and, therefore, preferred an appeal on the file of the Appellate Tribunal.
When the writ petitions were considered by the Hon''ble Single Judge, His Lordship thought that justice would be subserved by granting liberty to the writ petitioners to seek for their addition in the said appeal.
Mr.Balaraj submits that the complainants are not necessary parties in the appeal.
We are unable to accept his contention as the notice emerged out of the complaint filed by the complainants. At least, they are proper parties to the proceeding.
Therefore, we do not find any merit in the writ appeals.
The application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the writ appeals are dismissed.
In view of the dismissal of the writ appeals, I.A.No.II of 2016 does not survive for consideration and is, also, dismissed.
We make no order as to costs..