Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 5946
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA, J
Ansal Forte Apartment Owners Association Represented By Its President – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka Represented By Chief Secretary – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO. 52861 OF 2016 (LB-RES)
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI. NIKIT BALA., ADVOCATE
For the Respondent:SRI. BOPANNA BELLIAPPA., AGA FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI. GOUTHAMDER.C.ULLAL., ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI.T.M.VENKATA REDDY., ADVOCATE
The court affirmed the legality of a storm water drain and the rights of property owners who relinquished land for public utility, ruling that authorities could not claim rights over the occupied land.
Headnote:(A) Writ Jurisdiction - Recognition of Storm Water Drain - The court directed the respondents to recognize the storm water drain constructed by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike as lawful, emphasizing the relinquishment of land for public utility. (Paras 1, 8)
(B) Land Use and Planning - The court found that the construction of the apartment complex was sanctioned by the Planning Authority, and the owners had voluntarily provided alternative land for the drain. (Paras 2, 4, 7)
(C) Authority's Rights - The court ruled that the BDA and BBMP could not claim rights over the land occupied by the apartment, as alternative arrangements were made. (Paras 6, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought recognition of a storm water drain and protection against demolition of an apartment complex, asserting that the construction was approved and alternative land was provided for drainage.
Findings of Court:
The court allowed the writ petition, affirming the legality of the storm water drain and the rights of the apartment owners.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the storm water drain and the rights of the authorities over the land occupied by the apartment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the relinquishment of land for public utility was valid and that the authorities could not claim rights over the land occupied by the apartment.
Result: Writ Petition allowed.
ORAL ORDER
1. The prayer in this Writ Petition is as follows-
“A. Direct the respondents to recognize the new storm water drain constructed by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike on land bearing Sy.No.16/2A situated at Roopena Agrahara Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk as a lawful Storm Water Drain, by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other writ or an order in the nature of a writ against the respondents.”
B. Direct the respondents not to initiate any coercive proceedings, including any steps for demolition of the residential apartments under the name and style of Ansal Forte, or any part or precincts thereof constructed on Sy.No.16/2A situated at Roopena Agrahara village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk by issuing a Writ of mandamus and or any other writ or an order in the nature of a writ against the respondents.”
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the Planning Authority i.e., the BDA had approved the construction of an apartment complex in the year 1995 and also accorded approval to its modification in the year 1998 and in accordance with this sanction plan an apartment called ‘Ansal Forte’ was constructed, to which the BDA had also granted an occupancy certificate in the year 2003.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that thereafter it was noticed that the apartment complex had been erected by using a portion of the land which was earmarked for drain to an extent of 8ft. and therefore, after negotiations, the owners of the land on which the apartment was put up voluntarily relinquished an alternate land measuring about 2000 sq.ft. in the adjoining survery number which they owned for the purpose of making a rajakaluve.
4. It is their case that pursuant to this registered relinquishment deed executed by owners of the property, the Corporation has, in fact, constructed a storm water drain in that particular place, and therefore, there is a free flow of storm water.
5. It is also stated that subsequently the Association i.e., the petitioner sought for permission to close the drain and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike ('the BBMP') also accorded its approval for closing the drain and an agreement in that regard was also entered into on 04.08.2007. But, nevertheless, despite these facts, an attempt was made by the authorities to take action against the petitioner on the ground that the land earmarked for rajakaluve had been appropriated unlawfully.
6. The BBMP has, today, filed statement of objections in which it is stated as follows –
“4. As per the Relinquishment Deed dated: 09/03/2006 1. Smt. Parvathi PR W/o late HR Rajashekar Reddy, 2. HR Ravichandra S/o of late Rajashekar Reddy, 3. Sri. K M Lakshmi W/o Sri. G Prasad Reddy and 4. Smt. H K Anupama W/o of Ramanaprasad Reddy (First party Sl. No.1 to 4) have executed the relinquishment deed in favour of Bangalore Development Authority represented by Executive Engineer, East Division BDA (Second party). As per the Relinquishment Deed, the first party is the owner of the land bearing No.16/2A in Sy No. 16/2A and have also constructed an apartment known as "Ansal Forte". There already existed Rajakaluve in the first party's land in Sy. No. 16/2A, in which out of 16 ft. of drain, the first party unknowingly have acquired 8 Ft of land and have constructed a Ansal Forte Apartment building in the remaining 8 Ft of land, the building is existing. The people residing at Ansal Forte, without damaging the apartment building have provided an alternate land, i.e., the first party have surrendered portion of the land measuring to extent of 2400 Sqft in Sy. No. 17/9A and 4600 Sqft in Sy. No. 16/2A for the purpose of making of Rajakaluve to enable free flow of water in the interest of public. The Second party, i.e., BDA has permitted first party use, the said relinquished land has passage by covering with slab. The first party has handed over / relinquished an extent of 7000 sqft of land in survey No. 17/9A and 16/2A situated at Roopena Agrahara village, Begur Hobli,
