Karnataka High Court
Smt Sangeetha V vs The State Of Karnataka on 21 August, 2025
Author: Ravi V Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:32756
WP No. 25774 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
WRIT PETITION NO. 25774 OF 2023 (EXCISE)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SANGEETHA V.,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
D/O LATE G. VASUDEVAN @ G. DEVAN,
W/O SAGAR,
R/AT NO. 13/17, 2ND FLOOR,
KANDASWAMY MUDALIYAR ROAD,
RICHARDS TOWN,
BENGALURU - 560 005.
...PETITIONER
(BY SMT. SUDHA D., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Digitally signed by
GEETHAKUMARI
PARLATTAYA S 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER
Location: High IN KARNATAKA,
Court of Karnataka 2ND FLOOR, TTMC 'A' BLOCK,
BMTC BUILDING, SHANTHINAGAR,
BENGALURU 560 027.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
K.G. ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE,
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT,
ABHAKARI BHAVAN,
BYATARAYANAPURA,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:32756
WP No. 25774 of 2023
HC-KAR
BANGALORE - 560 092.
5. SMT. MANJULA,
W/O LATE G. VASUDEVAN @ G. DEVAN,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
RA/T NO. 13/17, 2ND FLOOR,
KANDASWAMY MUDALIYAR ROAD,
RICHARDS TOWN,
BENGALURU - 560 005.
6. VISHAL,
S/O LATE G. VASUDEVAN @ G. DEVAN,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 13/17, 2ND FLOOR,
KANDASWAMY MUDALIYAR ROAD,
RICHARDS TOWN,
BENGALURU - 560 005.
7. AISHWARYA,
D/O LATE G. VASUDEVAN@ G. DEVAN,
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 13/17, 2ND FLOOR,
KANDASWAMY MUDALIYAR ROAD,
RICHARDS TOWN,
BENGALURU - 560 005.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI BHOJEGOWDA T. KORLER, AGA FOR R1 TO R4;
SRI T. NARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI MOHAN BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R5 TO R7)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING RESPONDENT
NO.4 TO INCORPORATE NAME OF PETITIONER IN LICENSE IN FORM
CL-9 AS PER ANNEXURES-B AND C ALONG WITH OTHER LEGAL
HEIRS ARRAYED AS RESPONDENTS NO.5, 6 AND 7 RESPECTIVELY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
B-GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:32756
WP No. 25774 of 2023
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus to direct respondent no.4 to incorporation petitioner's name in CL- 9 licences in Annexures-B and C along with respondents no.5 to 7 respectively.
2. Smt.Sudha D., learned counsel for petitioner submitted that one Sri G Vasudevan was holder of two CL-9 licences as per Annexures-B and C. He died on 02.10.2015 as per death certificate at Annexure-A, leaving behind legal representatives namely, petitioner and respondents no.5 to 7. After death of her father, petitioner was deserted by her husband and she was required to fend for herself with a minor daughter. Therefore, petitioner sought accommodation in portion of house in which respondents no.5 to 7 were also staying. She filed O.S.no.8774/2017 on file of City Civil Court, Bengaluru, for partition and separate possession of her 1/4th share in estate of her father. Said suit was pending. In said suit, petitioner had included CL-9 licenses also in schedule. However, respondents took defence of bar of jurisdiction in view of Section 68B of Karnataka Excise Act, 1965. In view of same, petitioner was constrained to approach this Court as -4- NC: 2025:KHC:32756 WP No. 25774 of 2023 HC-KAR petitioner apprehended that respondents were likely to transfer or create third party rights insofar as CL-9 licences. It was submitted, Rule 17-A of Karnataka Excise Licenses (General Conditions) Rules, 1967, provided for inclusion of names of all legal heirs in licences issued under said Rules. Failure to consider petitioner's claim justified petitioner seeking reliefs.
3. Learned AGA appearing for respondents no.1 to 4 and Sri T Narayana, learned counsel appearing for Sri Mohan Bhat, learned counsel for respondents no.5 to 7 opposed writ petition.
4. Heard learned counsel and perused writ petition.
5. Admittedly, petitioner is seeking writ of mandamus directing respondent no.4 to incorporate her name in CL-9 licences at Annexures-B and C along with names of respondents no.5 to 7.
6. It is settled legal position that for seeking writ of mandamus, petitioner has to establish existence of legal right, respondents being under corresponding legal duty, demand made by petitioner and it's actual or deemed refusal. -5-
NC: 2025:KHC:32756 WP No. 25774 of 2023 HC-KAR
7. In instant case, though petitioner sought mandamus, there is no material placed on record to indicate that petitioner had made any demand or filed application with any of respondents for inclusion of her name in CL-9 licences. Petitioner has also not filed any documents to establish her heirship.
8. In view of above, necessary ingredients for issuance of writ of mandamus are not satisfied and present writ petition would be untenable. Hence, it is disposed of reserving liberty to petitioner to file application along with documents establishing her heirship to Sri G.Vasudevan, earlier licences holder. In case, such application is filed, respondents no.1 to 4 are directed to consider same, in accordance with law, after providing opportunity to respondents no.5 to 7 and pass appropriate orders thereon.
With above observations, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE AV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32