Allowed

Smt. M.S. Rajeshwari v. the Joint Commissioner

Karnataka HC2 Sept 2022WP/8494/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Bench allowed a writ petition filed by three sisters seeking registration of a property acquired via a registered gift deed. The court held that the BBMP was obligated to register the katha in their name under Section 114(3) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, quashed the rejection endorsement, and ordered reconsideration of the application within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The impugned endorsement rejecting the application for registration was quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the applications submitted by the petitioners within six weeks.

Smt. M.S. Rajeshwari Vs the Joint Commissioner — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.8494/2016 (LB-BMP)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. M.S. RAJESHWARI W/O SHRI K.R. SURESH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO.14/2-1, MUDDANNA LINE RIGHT SIDE, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶9

SMT. M.S. ANUSUYA W/O SHRI KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT NO.24/1, 2ND LINK ROAD, 7TH CROSS, CHOLURPALYA, NEAR NAGALINGESHWAR TEMPLE, BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶10

SMT. RADHA RAMESH W/O SHRI K.R. RAMESH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.40, 8TH CROSS, CHOLURPALYA, BENGALURU - 560 023.

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

(BY SRI PRAKASH T. HEBBAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, WEST ZONE, MALLESWARAM, BENGALURU - 560 003.

¶15

¶16

THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER VIJAYANAGAR WARD, BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, 1ST FLOOR, 9TH CROSS, RPC LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 040.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI S.N. PRASHANTH CHANDRA, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT TO THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONERS DATED 8.9.2015, AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 114 OF THE KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT BY QUASHING THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 13.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE R-2 AS PER ANNEXURE-A IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 114 OF KARNATAKA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1976 AND ETC.

¶20

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

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioners claim that they have acquired right, title and interest over the schedule property by virtue of a registered gift deed dated 9.6.2010. In pursuance of the gift deed dated 9.6.2010, the petitioners submitted an application with the respondents - BBMP to register the katha in their favour in respect of the schedule property as specified under Section 114(3) of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 (for short `Act'). The said application came to be rejected stating that the objection has been submitted by Sri M R Sathyanarayana and

¶23

¶24

only after settling the dispute with the said person, the application for registering the katha in their favour may be submitted. Taking exception to the same, this writ petition is filed.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶26

The petitioners claim to have acquired right, title and interest over the schedule property by virtue of the registered gift deed. Section 114(3) of the Act specifies that whenever such transfer comes to the knowledge of the Commissioner or authorized officer through such notice, the name of the transferee shall be entered in the property tax register. In the present case, in the absence of any order of restraint passed by the jurisdictional Civil Court, the respondent - BBMP was under an obligation to register the katha in favour of the petitioners as specified under sub-section 3 of Section 114 of the Act. Hence, the impugned endorsement issued by the respondents-BBMP rejecting the application submitted by the petitioners is contrary to Section 114(3) of the Act. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶29

¶30

ii) The impugned endorsement dated 13.10.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent vide Annexure-A is hereby quashed.

¶31

iii) The 2nd respondent is hereby directed to reconsider the applications dated 4.7.2015 and 8.9.2015 submitted to register the katha in favour of the petitioners in respect of the schedule property as specified under Section 114(3) of the Act or 149 of the BBMP Act. The said exercise shall be concluded within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶32

Sd/JUDGE

¶33

bkm

Smt. M.S. Rajeshwari v. the Joint Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. M.S. Rajeshwari v. the Joint 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

Nagaraju R. Vs Government of Karnataka

T Ramu Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Dr. Varalakshmi Vs the Commissioner

Sri Chandrashekar H Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt.K.Parijatha Vs Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike

M/S P M J Constructions Private Limited Vs the Commissioner