1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 20^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI

REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO.1685 OF 2014 (INJ)

BETWEEN:

THE COMMISSIONER,

BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,

N.R.SQUARE,

BANGALORE - 560 002.

… APPELLANT

(BY SRI.N.R.JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

SMT.PRABHA,

W/O D.VENKATESH MURTHY,

AGED 48 YEARS.

2.

D.VENKATESH MURTHY,

S/O LATE DEVAPPA,

AGED 55 YEARS,

BOTH ARE R/O NO.20/8,

BSK 2^ND STAGE,

KADIRENAHALLI CIRCLE,

BANGALORE - 560 070.

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.M.M.SWAMY, ADVOCATE)

THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 96 OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE CODE, 1908.

2

THIS RFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR

JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT

THIS DAY, THIS COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Sri.Jagadeeswara.N.R learned counsel for appellant

and Sri.M.M.Swamy learned counsel for respondents No.1

and 2 have appeared through video conferencing.

2.

This is an appeal from the Court of XIII

Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Mayo Hall Unit,

Bangalore.

3.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are

referred to as per their rankings before the Trial Court.

4.

The short facts are these:-

It is stated that the first plaintiff purchased the

immovable

property

bearing

No.45/A,

Ward

No.55,

Padmanabha Nagar, 13^th Main Road, Radhakrishna HBCS

3^rd stage, Bangalore (old Kathriguppe Village, Uttarahalli

Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk), measuring East to West

26+35/2 feet and North to South 45 feet (Schedule 'A'

3

property) under a registered sale deed datedd:21.01.1999.

After the purchase, the Corporation conferred katha in the

name of first plaintiff and she also paid the requisite tax.

She obtained a sanctioned plan from the defendant -

Corporation in L.P.No.600/98-99 to construct the building

thereon.

It is stated that the vendor of the first plaintiff was

allotted the schedule 'A' site by the Radhakrishna House

Building Co-operative Society Limited by virtue of the sale

deed dated 11.03.1997 and the BDA had conferred the

katha of the schedule 'A' property upon the vendor of the

first plaintiff. He had also obtained a sanctioned plan from

BDA, Bangalore to construct a building upon the schedule

'A' property.

It is pleaded that the second plaintiff purchased site

No.50/A, Ward 55, Padmanabha Nagar, 13^th Main Road,

Radhakrishna HBCS 3^rd stage, Bangalore (old Kathriguppe

Village,

Uttarahalli

Hobli,

Bangalore

South

Taluk),

measuring East to West 100 feet and North to South 30

4

feet, (schedule 'B' property) under a registered sale deed

dated 02.02.2005. The schedule 'B' property was allotted

to the vendor of the second plaintiff by the Radhakrishna

House Building Co-operative Society Limited by virtue of

sale deed dated 22.02.2001.

Plaintiffs pleaded that they have put up a small shed

in schedule 'A' and 'B' properties to protect and preserve

the suit properties.

It is alleged that during the 1^st week of April, 2008

the officials of the Corporation came near the suit property

and threatened to demolish the structures; that they would

issue notice for the demolition of the structures under the

provisions of Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976.

Hence, plaintiffs sought the aid of the Court and filed

a suit for permanent injunction.

After service of the suit summons, defendant -

Corporation appeared through their counsel and filed

written statement. The Corporation denied the plaint

5

averments. The Corporation contended that the suit is not

maintainable in view of non-issuance of notice under

Section 482 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act,

1976.

They stated that the alleged sites bearing No.45/A

and 50/A are not in existence in survey number 130/1 (Old

No.71). The sites are not formed and carved out in the

said survey number as