Allowed

Sri.M.R. Chandrashekar, v. Sri.Rudrappa

Karnataka HC21 Mar 2023RP/141/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the review petition in review no. 141 of 2023. The directions regarding the Phodi in the impugned judgment are held to enure to the benefit of title holders and those in possession. Contentions of persons aggrieved or partial beneficiaries are kept open for redressal before jurisdictional authorities or civil courts.

What did the court decide?

Review petition allowed against W.P. No. 16601/2022; directions regarding Phodi to enure to benefit of title holders; contentions of aggrieved parties kept open.

Sri.M.R. Chandrashekar, Vs Sri.Rudrap… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

RP No. 141 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶7

REVIEW PETITION NO. 141 OF 2023

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI.M.R. CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O LATE RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDING OF MARASANDRA VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA HOBLI, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU.

¶10

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI. M.R. SHIVARUDRAIAH, S/O LATE RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/O NO. 198, 1^ST FLOOR,1^ST STAGE, 6th A MAIN ROAD, MIG A SECTOR, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN, BANGALORE 560 064.

¶12

…PETITIONERS (BY SRI. D.L.N RAO., SENIOR COUNSEL A/W SRI. SRINIVASA C.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI. RUDRAPPA SINCE DEAD BY LRS.

¶15

T RUDRAPPA, S/O LATE RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDENT OF MARASANDRA VILLAGE, HESARAGHATTA NORTH TALUK, BENGLAURU 560 101.

¶16

¶17

RP No. 141 of 2023

¶18

SRI. SOMASHEKAR, S/O LATE RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, R/AT NO. 177, 11^TH A MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, A SECTOR, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN, BENGALURU 560 064.

¶19

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKASA SOUDHA, DR. B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560 001. REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.

¶20

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT KANDAYA BHAVAN, K.G ROAD, BANGALORE 560 009.

¶21

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE NORTH SUB-DIVISION, KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 009.

¶22

THE TAHASILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK (ADDITIONAL), MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE 560 064.

¶23

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, LAND RECORDS AND SURVEY, YELAHNAKA TALUK, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, YELAHANKA, BANGALORE 560 064.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI.R SRINIVASA GOWDA, AGA FOR R3 TO R7)

¶26

THIS REVIEW PETITION UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO (I) CALL FOR RECORDS IN W.P. 16601/2022II) REVIEW AND JUDGMENT IN W.P. 16601/2022 AND REVIEW AND JUDGMENT IN W.P.NO.16601/2022 DATED 21/11/2022 AND ALLOW THIS REVIEW PETITION BY DISMISSING THE W.P. 16601/2022.

¶27

¶28

RP No. 141 of 2023

¶29

THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶30

ORDER

¶31

Both the sides having argued the matter for some time, now graciously agree with the suggestion of this Court that the Phodi accomplished in terms of judgment now put in review shall enure to the benefit of such of the parties or anyone claiming under them who hold title or possession of the subject properties and that anyone aggrieved, including partial beneficiaries of Phodi work can work out the redressal for their grievance before the jurisdictional authority or Civil Courts and that in that connection, all contentions be kept open.

¶32

Ordered accordingly, Review Petition is disposed off.

¶33

No costs.

¶34

Sd/JUDGE

¶35

Bsv

Sri.M.R. Chandrashekar, v. Sri.Rudrappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.M.R. Chandrashekar, v. Sri.Rudrappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Kempegowda Rural House Building Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Kempegowda Rural House Building Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. T M Narayanaswamy Vs the Principal Secretary

Gopal S Vs Bangalore Development Authority

S Nagaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Manjulamma Vs the State of Karnataka