Dismissed

Sri.N.S. Gangadhar v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC19 Jun 2024RP/20/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court dismissed review petition seeking exemption from furnishing conversion order on grounds of deemed conversion. Bench reserved liberty to file fresh application.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to file fresh application seeking exemption on basis of deemed conversion. Review petition dismissed.

What the court decided

Sri.N.S. Gangadhar Vs the State of Karnataka — Karnataka HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:22197 RP No. 20 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶7

REVIEW PETITION NO. 20 OF 2024

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI.N.S. GANGADHAR AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, S/O LATE N B SHIVARUDRAPPA R/AT DEVIRINILAYA, DHONOJI PALYA, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE - 562123.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. SARAVANA S.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by NARAYANAPPA LAKSHMAMMA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT M.S.BUILDING DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPT. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶15

THE CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL REPT. BY ITS COMMISSIONER NELAMANGALA BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562123

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. G.C. YOGISH, AGA FOR R1 SRI. G NATARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 R/W SECTION 114 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 08/12/2023 IN W.P.NO.19030/2023, IN SAID PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:22197 RP No. 20 of 2024

¶21

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

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The above review petition has been filed seeking for the following reliefs:

¶24

i. Review the order dated 08.12.2023 in W.P.No.19030/2023, in said petition in the interest of justice and equity; and

¶25

ii. Pass such other order as the Circumstance of the Case warrants in the ends of justice.”

¶26

This Court vide its order dated 8.12.2023 in WP.No.19030/2023 had passed the following order:

¶27

“ORDER

¶28

i. The writ petition is disposed of, with a direction to the petitioner to furnish the documents sought for in Annexure-J and such other documents as may be necessary for processing of the application of the petitioner including conversion order.

¶29

ii. Respondent No.2 is permitted to issue a fresh endorsement detailing out all the documents required under respondent No.2 to process the application of the petitioner.”

¶30

The submission of Sri S.Saravana, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the concerned land coming within the urban agglomeration, there is a deemed conversion of the said property and there is no requirement for production of a conversion order and as such, he seeks for a modification of the order dated 8.12.2023 by the above

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:22197 RP No. 20 of 2024

¶33

review petition exempting the furnishing of conversion order.

¶34

Sri G.Nataraj, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the application made by the petitioner being an online application contending that the property is a Gram Thana property, it would require for the online application to be considered for the Applicant to produce all the relevant documents to support that the said land is a Gram Thana land and that conversion has been effected. If the petitioner were to file a separate application claiming deemed conversion, then the same would be considered accordingly. But neither the software nor the Rules permit the respondent No.2 to now consider the application on the basis of a contention that there is a deemed conversion.

¶35

Having heard both the counsels, I am of the considered opinion that the submissions made by Sri G.Nataraj, learned counsel for respondent No.2 holds merit, inasmuch as the application itself having been made in online manner contending that there is a conversion, conversion order was required to be

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:22197 RP No. 20 of 2024

¶38

produced. However, the same apparently having occurred on account of mistake as contended by Sri Saravana, the petitioner cannot be deprived of making a fresh application seeking for exemption from furnishing the conversion order by claiming deemed conversion.

¶39

In that view of the matter, the order cannot be reviewed as sought for, but reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application seeking for exemption on the basis of deemed conversion, the petition stands dismissed.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

¶42

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 18

Sri.N.S. Gangadhar v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Sri.N.S. Gangadhar v. the State of Karnataka

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

Mr Asif Vs Smt. B Latha

Sri Mahadevaiah Vs Smt Bhagya Since Deceased by Her Lrs

Sri. Bhagyaraju Vs Smt Prema

Sri Syed Zahiruddin Vs Sri Fazloor Rahaman

Shadaksharaiah Vs Basavaraju

Sri M M Mustaffa Vs Mrs Pauline Queeny Anand