Partly allowed

Sri Koluru Eshwaragoud Nagaraj v. the Commissioner

Karnataka HC14 Sept 2022WP/8202/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposes of two writ petitions challenging the cancellation of a style of Katha. The Court held that a respondent with a valid auction sale deed is entitled to Katha registration under Section 114 and directed the BBMP to record it within six weeks, dismissing the opposing petition.

What did the court decide?

Directs respondent-BBMP to register Katha in favour of Respondent No.3 within six weeks from receipt of certified copy of this order.

Sri Koluru Eshwaragoud Nagaraj Vs the Commissioner — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.51738 OF 2015(LB-BMP)

¶7

c/w

¶8

WRIT PETITION No.8202 OF 2018(LB-BMP)

¶9

IN WP NO.51738/2015

¶10

BETWEEN :

¶11

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.

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI M G JAVEED AHMEDKHAN, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND :

¶15

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE SOUTH DIVISION

¶16

9^TH MAIN ROAD

¶17

9^TH CROSS, JAYANAGAR 2^ND BLOCK BANGALORE-560 011.

¶18

THE ASST. REVENUE OFFICER KORAMANGALA SUB DIVISION BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE WARD NO.151, BANGALORE-560 095.

¶19

¶20

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.

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI PAVAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI H DEVENDRAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2 SRI S V DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R3)

¶23

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.

¶24

IN WP NO.8202/2018

¶25

BETWEEN :

¶26

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 7^TH PHASE, NEAR BRIGADE MILLENIUM BENGALURU.

¶27

REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AS G.P.A. HOLDER

¶28

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 7^TH PHASE, NEAR BRIGADE MILLENIUM BENGALURU. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI S V DESAI, ADVOCATE)

¶29

¶30

AND:

¶31

THE COMMISSIONER OF BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BENGALURU.

¶32

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (SOUTH) SOUTH ZONE, JAYANAGAR OF BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE 9^TH MAIN, 9^TH CROSS 2^ND 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

¶33

¶34

RESIDING AT NO.104 MEMPHIS APARTMENT NO.7, LANGFORD ROAD LANGFORD TOWN BENGALURU-560 025.

¶35

…RESPONDENTS

¶36

(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)

¶37

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 2^ND RESPONDENT.

¶38

THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

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.

¶41

The parties are referred to their ranking in W.P.No.51738/2015 for the sake of convenience.

¶42

¶43

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.

¶44

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

¶45

¶46

of the subject site in pursuance of registered sale deed executed in his favour.

¶47

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.

¶48

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

¶49

¶50

in favour of petitioner is null and void and the same does not bind respondent No.3 or the respondent-BDA.

¶51

I have examined the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶52

8. Perusal of the documents filed by the respondent-

¶53

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

¶54

¶55

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

¶56

following:

¶57

Order

¶58

i) Writ Petition No.51738/2015 is dismissed.

¶59

ii) Writ Petition No.8202/2018 is allowed.

¶60

iii) The impugned order dated 28.10.2015 passed by the respondent-BBMP is modified in so far it relates to refusing to register the Katha in favour of respondent No.3.

¶61

iv) Respondent-BBMP is hereby directed to register the Katha in favour of respondent No.3 in respect of site

¶62

¶63

bearing No.114 situated at Koramangala Layout, Jakkasandra Block, measuring 111.93 Sq. Mtrs., within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶64

Sd/JUDGE

¶65

Sri Koluru Eshwaragoud Nagaraj v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Koluru Eshwaragoud Nagaraj v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K a Swathi Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. A.K. Shivamurthy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri K Armugachari Vs State of Karnataka

Sri M G Gangaiah Vs the Commissioner Bbmp

Sri G Lakshmikanth Vs State of Karnataka

Shri Honnagangaiah Vs the Commissioner