Disposed

Sri Joseph George v. the Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC8 Nov 2024RP/537/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Review petition pointing out that the court had printed reasoning from an unrelated decision in its earlier judgment disposing of a writ petition concerning BBMP land acquisition/TDR matters. The court regretted the error, recalled the earlier order, and restored the writ petition for fresh disposal.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 21.04.2022 recalling disposal of W.P.No.21542/2021; writ petition restored to Board for disposal by Roster Bench; liberty to seek leave for additional documents.

Sri Joseph George Vs the Government of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:45248 RP No. 537 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 8^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶6

REVIEW PETITION NO. 537 OF 2022

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI JOSEPH GEORGE, S/O LATE A MARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT NO.53, JMJ BUILDING, IMMADIHALLI ROAD, OPP NIDHI MEDICALS, WHITE FILED, BANGALORE -560 066.

¶9

Digitally signed by SHARADA VANI B

¶10

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶11

SRI. IQBAL AHMED, S/O LATE SRI ABDUL AZEEZ, REP BY HIS GPA HOLDER S/O SRI SALMAN AHMED SHARIFF S/O IQBAL AHMED, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.40, OPP METLIFE PHARMA, IIMADIHALLI ROAD, BANGALORE -560 066.

¶12

SRI. ABDUL RAHAMAN, S/O ABDUL RASHID KHAN, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT NO.456, MEER SAHEB COMPOUND, II CROSS, IMMADIHALLI ROAD,

¶13

BANGALORE-560 066.

¶14

SRI ZAKIR HUSSAIN, S/O LATE K R SHARIEF, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,

¶15

SRI. PRAVEEZ AHMED, S/O LATE K R SHARIEF, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:45248 RP No. 537 of 2022

¶17

BOTH ARE R/AT NO.324, MEER SAHEB COMPOUND, IMMADIHALLI ROAD, BANGALORE -560 066.

¶18

SRI. MEER ZAIUDDIN, S/O MEER ABDUL QADIR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/AT NO.619, LABH VILLA, WHITE FIELD MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-560 066.

¶19

MEER ASLAM S/O MEER ABDUL KHADAR, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.297, OUTER CIRCLE, WHITEFIELD, BANGALORE -560 066.

¶20

SMT. SIDDAQUA BEGUM, W/O LATE JAVEED AHMED SHARIFF, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT 2^ND CROSS, MEER SAB COMPOUND, IMMADIHALLI MAIN ROAD, WHITE FIELD, BANGALORE -560 066.

¶21

SRI. FAREED AHAMED SHARIFF S/O LATE ABDUL SAMAD SAB AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, R/AT NO.333 MEER SAB COMPOUND, 1^ST CROSS, IMMADIHALLI ROAD, WHITE FIELD, BANGALORE-560 066. (THE PETITIONERS ARE NOT CLAIMING THE BENEFIT OF SENIOR CITIZENSHIP )

¶22

…PETITIONERS

¶23

(BY SRI. ANANDEESWARA D R.,ADVOCATE)

¶24

AND:

¶25

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE -560 001.

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:45248 RP No. 537 of 2022

¶27

THE COMMISSIONER, BBMP, N R SQUARE, BBMP MAIN OFFICE, BANGALORE-560 002.

¶28

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, LAND ACQUISITION AND( T D R), BBMP MAIN OFFICE, BANGALORE -560 002.

¶29

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, DEPARTMENT OF ROAD AND BASIC FACILITIES, MAHADEVAPURA DIVISION, BBMP BANGALORE -560 002.

¶30

…RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI.M RAJAKUMAR., AGA FOR R1; SRI.N R JAGADEESWARA.,ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)

¶32

THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO (A) TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 21/04/2022 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO. 21542/2021(LB-BMP) BY ALLOWING THIS REVIEW PETITION AND CONSIDER THE WRIT PETITION ON MERITS AND (B) PASS ANY ORDER(S) OR (DIRECTION) S AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶33

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

¶34

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

Learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner

¶37

points out the grave error committed by this court in printing the reasoning part of some other decision not

¶38

¶39

NC: 2024:KHC:45248 RP No. 537 of 2022

¶40

connected to the case in the judgement put in review. This

¶41

court sincerely regrets its mistake.

¶42

Learned AGA appearing for the 1^st Respondent

¶43

and learned Panel Counsel appearing for the rest of the respondents, fairly supports the case of review petitioner. This is appreciable.

¶44

In the above circumstances, the review petition having been favoured, the order dated 21.04.2022 whereby W.P.No.21542/2021 * (LB-BMP) was disposed off stands recalled. As a consequence writ petition stands restored to the Board for being disposed off by the Roster Bench in accordance with law.

¶45

It is open to the petitioner to press into service the application seeking leave to put on record the additional documents if required.

¶46

Sd/(KRISHNA S DIXIT) JUDGE

¶47

Snb/

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

¶49

*Corrected vide chamber order dated 15.11.2024.

Sri Joseph George v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Joseph George v. the Government of Karnataka

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

Udayakumar Shetty Vs Seetharama Shetty

Sri Adichunchanagri Vidyavarthaka Trust R Vs Siloam Zion Gospel Fellowship

Sri M N Srinivasa, Vs Siddaraju

The Karnataka Slum Development Board Vs Smt Jayamma

Pigeon Education Technology India Private Limited Vs the Directorate of Enforcement

Aishwaryagiri Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Karnataka