Disposed

Sri Muniraju,K.N. v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Aug 2024RP/310/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A review petition against an earlier writ disposal that had relegated parties to the Assistant Commissioner; since a revision was already pending before the Deputy Commissioner, the court modified its prior order, directed parties to agitate their rights there, and permitted the writ petitioners to file a fresh revision with limitation condonation.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri Muniraju,K.N. Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:32383 RP NO.310 OF 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

¶7

REVIEW PETITION NO.310 OF 2024

¶8

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO.16775 OF 2022

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

SRI. MUNIRAJU K.N. S/O LATE NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, KODAGALAHATTI VILLAGE, HUNASA MARANAHALLI POST, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 560 063.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

(BY SRI. M.R. RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. VENKATESHA, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

¶16

Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S M.S BUILDING, Location: High BENGALURU - 560 001. Court of Karnataka BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶17

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶18

SRI. N. VENKATESH S/O LATE M. NARAYANASWAMY ALIAS MATHIKERE NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NO.3, 1^ST CROSS, ANKAPPA BLOCK,

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC:32383 RP NO.310 OF 2024

¶21

J.C. NAGAR,

¶22

BENGALURU - 560 006.

¶23

SRI. N. RAVEENDRA S/O LATE M. NARAYANASWAMY ALIAS MATHIKERE NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT NO.3, 1^ST CROSS, ANKAPPA BLOCK, J.C. NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 006.

¶24

SRI. N. MURALIDHAR S/O LATE M. NARAYANASWAMY ALIAS MATHIKERE NARAYANASWAMY AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT NO. 3, 1^ST CROSS, ANKAPPA BLOCK, J.C. NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 006.

¶25

THE THASILDAR YELAHANKA TALUK, YELAHANKA

¶26

BENGALURU NORTH - 560 002.

¶27

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G. ROAD

¶28

BENGALURU.

¶29

SRI. K.P. MUNIGOWDA S/O LATE PAPANNA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, NO.523, KODAGALAHATTI VILLAGE, HUNISEMARAHANALLI POST, JALA HOBLI, YELAHANKA TALUK, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI. HANUMANTHARAY LAGALI, AGA FOR R1, R2, R6 AND R7; SRI. P.N. MANMOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5; SRI. N.R. RAGHAVENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R8)

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:32383 RP NO.310 OF 2024

¶34

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 READ WITH ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS COURT DATED 10^TH JULY, 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO.16775 OF 2022.

¶35

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶36

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

¶37

ORAL ORDER

¶38

This review petition is preferred against order dated 10^th July, 2024 passed in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022.

¶39

This Court, disposed of the Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022 on 10^th July, 2024 and relegated the parties to

¶40

appear before the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub-Division on 05^th August, 2024 at 03.00 p.m. to enable the said authority to take decision in the matter.

¶41

Heard Sri. M.R. Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel

¶42

on behalf of Sri. Venkatesha, appearing for the petitioner; Sri. Hanumantharaya Lagali, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1, 2, 6

¶43

¶44

NC: 2024:KHC:32383 RP NO.310 OF 2024

¶45

and 7; Sri. P.N. Manmohan, learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 5; and Sri. N.R. Raghavendra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.8.

¶46

It is brought to the notice of this Court in Review Petition that, Order dated 05^th July, 2021 passed in R.A.(BNA) No.202/2018 by the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub-Division is challenged before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in Revision Petition No.53/2022 and the matter is pending consideration before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District.

¶47

In that view of matter, as the said aspect has not been brought to the notice of this court while passing the order dated 10^th July, 2024 in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022, I am of the view that, order dated 10^th July, 2024 is required to be modified and parties be directed to agitate their rights before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in Revision Petition No.53/2022. Accordingly, Order dated 10^th July, 2024 passed in Writ

¶48

¶49

NC: 2024:KHC:32383 RP NO.310 OF 2024

¶50

Petition No.16775 of 2022 is modified with the consent of

¶51

the learned counsel appearing for the parties and parties are directed to agitate their rights before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in Revision Petition No.53/2022, which is pending consideration.

¶52

At this juncture, Sri. Manmohan P.N., learned counsel appearing for petitioners in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022 submitted that the Revision Petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in Revision Petition No.53/2022 is a stranger to the proceedings and therefore, petitioners in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022 be permitted to file Revision Petition before the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District.

¶53

Taking into consideration the submission made by learned counsel Sri. Manmohan P.N., it is open for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022 to challenge order dated 05^th July, 2021 passed in R.A.(BNA) No.202/2018 by the respondent No.2-Assisitant

¶54

¶55

NC: 2024:KHC:32383 RP NO.310 OF 2024

¶56

Commissioner, in a separate proceedings under Section 136(3) of the Karnataka Land Revenue Act, if so advised. In the event, if the petitioners in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022 files Revision Petition under Section 136(3) of the above Act, the concerned Revisional Authority shall condone the period spent by the petitioners in Writ Petition No.16775 of 2022 before this Court under Section 14 of the Limitation Act. All contentions of the parties are left open. With this observation, Review Petition stands

¶57

disposed of.

¶58

SD/(E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE

¶59

ARK

Sri Muniraju,K.N. v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri Muniraju,K.N. v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahadevappa Vs Basavarajappa

Mrs. Naseem Ahmad Vs Nil

Thimmayya Kottary Vs State Represented

Kempegowda Vs S Kiran

Narasimhamurthy Vs Lakshmamma

Sri. B. S. Subramanya Vs M/S. Bhoopalam S Bharath & Co.