The petitioner challenged notices seeking vacant possession of his land. The court observed the respondent did not compel surrender and disposed of the petition without further adjudication, preserving the right to initiate acquisition proceedings.
Petition disposed off as requiring no further adjudication; contentions kept open.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION No.49522/2014 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN :
Sri Joseph Thyagaraj, Son of the Late Thomasappa, Aged about 64 years, Residing at No.4/5, 4th Cross, Hutchins Road, St. Thomas Town Post, Bangalore - 560 084. … Petitioner
(By Sri Janardhana G., Advocate)
AND :
(By Sri Aravind M. Neglur, Advocate for R1; Sri Y.D. Harsha, AGA for R2)
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the notice dated 6.2.2013 vide Annexure-C and notice dated 18.9.2013 vide Annexure-D
2
calling upon the petitioner to deliver vacant possession of his lands in Sy. No.50/2, 50/3 and 50/4 situated at Nagwara Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for orders this day, the Court, made the following:
ORDER
Memo for retirement filed by Sri. V. Sreenidhi, learned counsel for respondent No.1 is accepted as Sri. Aravind M. Neglur, appears for the said respondent.
2. Petitioner has filed the present petition stating
that he is the owner of land bearing Sy. No. 50/2 measuring 39 guntas, Sy. No.50/3 measuring 39 guntas and Sy.No.50/4 measuring 25 guntas, all situated at Nagawara Vaillage, Bangalore. It is further submitted that the 1st respondent was insisting on the petitioner to deliver possession of the property for the purposes of making the land grant to enable distribution of sites. It is also submitted that the petitioner had made known his stand as per legal notice at Annexure-E stating that as the area has been fully developed and that it is not available nor suitable for the purposes as made out at Annexure-C.
3
makes it clear that the communication at Annexure-C would indicate that it is for the petitioner to accede to the request
for handing over of the land and no compulsion is cast on the petitioner to give up his land.
to initiate acquisition proceedings as per law if the land is required.
5. Accordingly, petition is disposed off .
Sd/JUDGE
VP
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of notices calling for delivery of vacant possession requires adjudication.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sri Joseph Thyagaraj
The Commissioner, B.B.M.P., Hudson Circle, Bangalore
The State of Karnataka, Ministry of Urban, Housing
S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
