Smt. Sunandamma Vs Bengaluru Development Authority

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER AND ACT UPON THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30.09.2021 AND 27.05.2024

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:2110 WP No. 1058 of 2025

¶20

(ANNEXURES-J AND K) SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN A TIMELY MANNER, ENSURING ALLOTMENT THE SCHEDULE PROPERTIES IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONER AND EXECUTE ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS, INCLUDING THE SALE DEEDS, TO CONVEY THE SAME AND ETC.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶23

ORAL ORDER

¶24

Sri.B.S.Sachin, learned counsel is directed to take notice for respondent-BDA.

¶25

Petitioner is before this Court seeking following

¶26

reliefs:

¶27

"a. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondent to consider and act upon the representation dated 30.09.2021 and 27.05.2024 (Annexures-J and K) submitted by the petitioner in a timely manner, ensuring allotment the Schedule Properties in favor of the petitioner and execute all necessary documents, including the Sale Deeds, to convey the same;

¶28

b. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to the Respondent to take immediate steps to ensure possession and conveyance of the schedule sites to the petitioner in accordance with the award and allotment made.

¶29

c. Pass such other order/s including the award of costs, as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity."

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:2110 WP No. 1058 of 2025

¶31

The above reliefs are sought on the premise that property in Sy.No.218 situated at Bheemanakuppegrama, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk, measuring 3 acres 9 guntas belong to one Chikkamudalaiah, father-in-law of the petitioner, who had three sons namely Thimmaiah, Chikkanna and Krishnappa and four daughters Lakkamma, Huchamma, Lakshmamma and Nagamma. Petitioner is the wife of third son (Krishnappa) of Chikkamudalaiah.

¶32

The aforesaid land was acquired for the purpose of formation of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout vide Final Notification dated 18.02.2010. In terms of the scheme the land owners are entitled for allotment of developed area and the compensation in the ratio of 40:60. That the respondentBDA by their communication/award notice issued under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act on 07.04.2012 had intimated that the sons of aforesaid Chikkamudalaiah including husband of the petitioner would be entitled for developed sites in respect of 2 acres 21 guntas. That the two brothers of the husband of the petitioner i.e., Thimmaiah, Chikkanna have already been allotted sites while the site to the share of the husband of the petitioner had not been allotted yet. Learned counsel for the

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:2110 WP No. 1058 of 2025

¶34

petitioner further referring to the Relinquishment Deed executed by four sisters in favour of their brothers produced at Annexure-H which is executed and registered on 08.10.2012, submits that there has been no dispute amongst the family members including the sisters and husband of the petitioner who have agreed to receive one site measuring 30x40 each after the allotment was made by respondent-BDA. He submits as such there is no impediment in respondent-BDA allotting the developed sites falling to the share of the husband of the petitioner. Hence submits that necessary direction in this regard is required on account of inaction on the part of respondent-BDA.

¶35

Learned counsel for respondent-BDA submits given sometime requisition of the petitioner would be considered in accordance with law and if it is found that the petitioner is entitled for allotment same would be considered thereafter.

¶36

Submission is taken on record.

¶37

Petition is disposed of. The respondent authorities are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner as per Annexure-J dated 30.09.2021 and Annexure-K dated

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:2110 WP No. 1058 of 2025

¶39

5 -

¶40

27.05.2024. If required personal hearing may also be given to the petitioner. Such consideration of the representations of the petitioner shall be made within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and decision in this regard be communicated to the petitioner in writing.

¶41

SD/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶42

SBN

¶43

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Smt. Sunandamma v. Bengaluru Development Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sunandamma v. Bengaluru Development Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri P R Seshadri @ Palghat Ramanathan Seshadri Vs State of Karnataka

Alwyn Patrao Vs State of Karnataka

Sri Mahima Dasegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Jagadish Reddy Vs State of Karnataka

Sri M Yallappa Vs the Commissioner

N.Sampath Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka