M/S. Emerald Agencies Vs the Commissioner

M/S. EMERALD AGENCIES REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED PARTNER MR. AZEEZ MOHAMMED S/O LATE MOHAMMED DADA AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS OFFICE AT NO.84 2^ND MAIN ROAD, N.T. PET BENGALURU-560 002. REGISTERED UNDER INDIAN PARTNERSHIP ACT, 1932.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI NAUMAN SHARIEF, ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by NAGARAJA B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU-560 002.

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU WEST OFFICE AT MALLESHWARAM OPPOSITE TO MANTRI MALL BENGALURU-560 010.

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC:20803 WP No. 2511 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER CHAMARAJPETE WARD GOODSHED ROAD, BENGALURU.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3)

¶23

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER AND PROCESS THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY RECORDS WITHIN A TIME-BOUND MANNER (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC.

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

In the captioned petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction of the third respondent in not considering the representation submitted for issuance of khatha in respect of the portion of the property purchased under a registered Sale Deed. Despite furnishing all requisite documents, the petitioner's request has not been acted upon. Alleging inaction and administrative apathy on the

¶28

3 -

¶29

NC: 2025:KHC:20803 WP No. 2511 of 2025

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

part of the third respondent, the petitioner is left with no alternative but to approach this Court by invoking its writ jurisdiction.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶33

The petitioner claims ownership over the

¶34

property bearing Corporation No.57, situated on Mysuru Road, Corporation Ward No.139, within the limits of the respondent-Corporation. The petitioner asserts that it has purchased a portion of the said property, measuring approximately 2007.05 square feet, under two registered Sale Deeds dated 16.02.2023 and 04.02.2023. Based on

¶35

the said registered Sale Deeds, the petitioner submitted a representation to the third respondent seeking transfer of khatha. Along with the representation, which is placed on record at Annexure-A, the petitioner has enclosed copies of the Sale Deeds, the mother deed, up-to-date property

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:20803 WP No. 2511 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

tax receipts in the name of the previous owner, and a

¶40

khatha endorsement certificate dated 07.01.2023.

¶41

Despite furnishing all relevant title and supporting documents along with the representation dated 24.10.2024, the third respondent has failed to take any action. The inaction of the third respondent is unjustified and reflects a lackadaisical approach. The reasoning cited by the third respondent that the petitioner has purchased only a portion of the larger property and that khatha cannot be issued without bifurcation is wholly untenable. Such excuses from municipal officials cannot be countenanced by this Court. It is due to such administrative apathy and inefficiency that this Court is inundated with petitions seeking basic statutory compliance.

¶42

When a purchaser, having acquired title under a registered Sale Deed, approaches the Corporation with all requisite documents, it is incumbent upon the municipal

¶43

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:20803 WP No. 2511 of 2025

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

authority to initiate and complete the bifurcation process

¶46

in accordance with the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976. Upon such bifurcation, an independent khatha must be issued in favour of the purchaser. The petitioner, being the lawful owner of the property as per registered title documents, has a statutory right to seek transfer of khatha. The third respondent is legally obliged to consider the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law and take necessary steps for khatha transfer.

¶47

In view of the foregoing, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

i) The Writ Petition is allowed.

¶50

ii) The third respondent is directed to take immediate action on the petitioner’s representation dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure-A) in accordance with law.

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:20803 WP No. 2511 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

iii) If the third respondent requires any additional

¶54

document(s), the same shall be intimated to the petitioner, who shall furnish the same without delay.

¶55

iv) If the third respondent is of the opinion that the land requires bifurcation in terms of the schedule contained in the Sale Deeds, appropriate steps shall be taken to effect subdivision, clearly delineating the petitioner's portion with reference to the boundaries as reflected in the registered documents.

¶56

v) The entire exercise shall be completed within a

¶57

period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶58

SD/(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE

¶59

DH

¶60

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5

M/S. Emerald Agencies v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Emerald Agencies v. the Commissioner

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

Smt v v Jyothi Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Renuka R Vs the State of Karnataka

Mr Mohammed Ghaise Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. M.Venkatarama Reddy Vs the State of Karnataka

M/S Midas Developers Vs State of Karnataka

M/S Amrutha Rama Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Karnataka