Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 59541
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON9BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION No.51738 OF 2015(LB-BMP)
c/w
WRIT PETITION No.8202 OF 2018(LB-BMP)
IN WP NO.51738/2015
BETWEEN:
SRI. ABDUL WAHEED SHAKOOR
S/O LATE ABDUL SHAKOOR
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.104
MEMPHIS APARTMENT
NO.7, LANGFORD ROAD
LANGFORD TOWN
BANGALORE-560 025.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI M G JAVEED AHMEDKHAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
SOUTH DIVISION
9TH MAIN ROAD
9TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 2ND BLOCK
BANGALORE-560 011.
2.
THE ASST. REVENUE OFFICER
KORAMANGALA SUB DIVISION
BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
WARD NO.151, BANGALORE-560 095.
2
3.
SRI KOLUR ESWARA GOUDA NAGARAJA
S/O K.G. ESWARA GOUDA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.21(5)
T.B. BHADRI COMPOUND
FORT, BELLARY-586102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI PAVAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI H DEVENDRAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2
SRI S V DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 READ WITH ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY R1 DATED
28.10.2015 AT ANNEXURE-H UNDER SECTION 114(A) OF THE
KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT.
IN WP NO.8202/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI. KOLURU ESHWARAGOUD NAGARAJ
S/O K.G. ESWARAGOUD
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/AT <ELITA PROMONADE APARTMENT
A-7 BLOCK, FLAT NO.1202, J.P.NAGAR
7TH PHASE, NEAR BRIGADE MILLENIUM
BENGALURU.
REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AS G.P.A. HOLDER
SRI. K G ESWARA GOUD
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA
AGED 72 YEARS
R/AT <ELITA PROMONADE APARTMENT
A-7 BLOCK, FLAT NO.1202, J.P.NAGAR
7TH PHASE, NEAR BRIGADE MILLENIUM
BENGALURU.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI S V DESAI, ADVOCATE)
3
AND:
1.
THE COMMISSIONER
OF BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
BENGALURU.
2.
THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (SOUTH)
SOUTH ZONE, JAYANAGAR
OF BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE
9TH MAIN, 9TH CROSS
2ND BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 011.
3.
THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER
KORAMANGALA SUB-DIVISION
OF BRUHAT BENGALURU
MAHANAGARA PALIKE, KORAMANGALA
BENGALORE-560 095.
4.
THE COMMISSIONER
OF BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(B D A), T CHOWDAIAH ROAD
KUMARA PARK (WEST)
BENGALURU-560 020.
5.
THE SECRETARY
OF BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(B D A ), T CHOWDAIAH ROAD
KUMARA PARK (WEST)
BENGALURU-560 020.
6.
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY
OF BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
(B D A), T CHOWDAIAH ROAD
KUMARA PARK (WEST)
BENGALURU-560 020.
7.
SRI ABDUL WAHEED SHAKOOR
S/O LATE ABDUL SHAKOOR
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
4
RESIDING AT NO.104
MEMPHIS APARTMENT
NO.7, LANGFORD ROAD
LANGFORD TOWN
BENGALURU-560 025.
&RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI ARAVIND M NEGLUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3
SRI M KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 TO R6
SRI M G JAVEED AHMED KHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R7)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT RESPONDENT Nos.1 TO 3 TO ENTER THE NAME OF THE
PETITIONER IN THE KHATA REGISTER AND OTHER REVENUE
RECORDS OF BBMP IN RESPECT OF SITE BEARING NO.114
MEASURING EAST-WEST 9.10 MTRS., NORTH-SOUTH:12.30
MTRS., TOTALLY MEASURING 111.93 SQ.MTRS., SITUATED AT
KORMANGALA LAYOUT, JAKKASANDRA BLOCK, BENGALURU BY
MODIFYING THE ORDER DATED 28.10.2015, PASSED VIDE
ANNEXURE- P PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 8B9 GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
Since the challenge in these writ petitions is to the
order dated 28.10.2015 passed by the respondent- Bruhat
Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), they are taken up
together and disposed of by this common order.
The parties are referred to their ranking in
W.P.No.51738/2015 for the sake of convenience.
5
The Site No.114 situated at Koramangala Layout,
Jakkasandra Block, Bengaluru Rural, measuring 30' x 40' is
the subject matter of these petitions. The erstwhile City
Improvement Trust Board (CITB) acquired Sy.No.22 of
Jakkasandra Village among other lands for the formation of
residential layout which culminated in passing of an award
dated 03.02.1975 and thereafter, possession of the said
lands were taken on 29.04.1975.
After
constitution
of
Bengaluru
Development
Authority (BDA), the lands which were acquired by the
erstwhile CITB vested with the BDA and thereafter, the
BDA formed a residential layout and allotted sites to
eligible persons. The subject site is a corner site, which
was auctioned on 28.10.2004. In the said auction,
respondent No.3 was the successful bidder and the site
was allotted in his favour and a registered sale deed dated
23.11.2009 was executed in his favour. Thereafter,
respondent No.3 submitted an application on 15.02.2010
with the respondent-BBMP to register the Katha in respect
6
of the subject site in pursuance of registered sale deed
executed in his favour.
The respondent-BBMP sought clarification from the
BDA as to whether the subject site was auctioned and the
respondent-BDA by communication dated 08.06.2010
confirmed the auction of the subject site in favour of the
petitioner in W.P.No.8202/2018. Since the Katha of the
subject site was standing in favour of the petitioner, an
enquiry was conducted by the BBMP and thereafter, the
Katha registered in favour of the petitioner was cancelled
and ordered for an enquiry, against which, the petitions
are filed.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and
learned counsel appearing for the respondent-BDA submits
that the site was formed in Sy.No.22 of Jakkasandra
Village, which was acquired by the erstwhile CITB and also
an award was passed. Thereafter, the said land among
other
lands
vested
with
the
CITB
free
from
all
encumbrances. Hence, submit that the sale deed executed
7
in favour of petitioner is null and void and the same does
not bind respondent No.3 or the respondent-BDA.
I have examined the submissions made by learned
counsel appearing for the parties.
8.
Perusal of the documents filed by the respondent-
BBMP along with statement of objections indicate that
Sy.No.22 of Jakkasandra Village, in which the subject site
formed was acquired by the erstwhile CITB and vested
with the said authority free from all encumbrances.
However, the petitioner is claiming his right in subject
property by virtue of sale deed dated 24.05.1993 by which
time, the subject site was already vested with BDA and the
sale deed executed in his favour is null and void and the
same is not binding on the respondent-BDA. Hence, the
petitioner is not entitled for registration of Katha in respect
of the subject site on the basis of the sale deed, which is
null and void and not binding on the respondent-BDA.
Respondent No.3 having purchased the subject site in an
auction conducted by the respondent-BDA through the
8
registered sale deed is entitled for registration of Katha as
specified under Section 114 of the Karnataka Municipal
Corporation Act ('Act' for short). The site was registered
in favour of the petitioner on 06.09.2013. The
proceedings under Section 114 of the Act was initiated in
2015 and the same is within three years of period of
limitation as prescribed under Section 114 of the Act.
Hence, the BBMP after cancelling the Katha registered in
favour of the petitioner was under an obligation to register
the Katha in favour of respondent No.3. Hence, I pass the
following:
Order
i)
Writ Petition No.51738/2015 is dismissed.
ii)
Writ Petition No.8202/201
