Smt. Joy Esther Chandra v. the Commissioner of Bbmp

Karnataka HC12 Jun 2026WP/16740/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Khatha certificate; 'A' or 'B' Khatha classification; BBMP property records; online Khatha application scheme; direction to consider representation refused, liberty to apply online and return to Court; Articles 226/227 writ; Bengaluru, K.R. Puram Hobli, Ward No.25 Horamavu; prior round W.P.No.3412/2024 orders dated 10.12.2024; WP No. 16740 of 2026 (LB-BMP); Justice B M Shyam Prasad; disposed with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to make an online application under the respondents' online scheme and to approach the Court, furnishing details of the online application, if no action is taken in terms of the scheme; no direction was issued to consider the representation dated 23-04-2026. ¶¶36

Smt. Joy Esther Chandra Vs the Commissioner of Bbmp — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 to 3, in particular respondent 3 (the Assistant Revenue Officer, Ward No.25), ought to be directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23-04-2026 (Annexure-A) for effecting the Khatha certificate of the schedule property in the petitioner's name.

¶¶22

Court's answer

The Court accepted as correct the respondents' Standing Counsel's submission that the respondents are considering the request for Khatha based on an online scheme, under which the petitioner must make an online application and her case for either 'A' or 'B' Khatha could be considered based on the status of the documents filed.

¶¶36

Ratio / Principle

The petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make an online application and to approach the Court if no action is taken in terms of the scheme, furnishing the details of the application submitted online.

¶¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka High Court (B M Shyam Prasad, J.) — Writ Petition No. 16740 of 2026 (LB-BMP) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, decided 12.06.2026. The petitioner, asserting ownership of site No.17/1, H.L.No.362/9A of K. Narayanapura Village, K.R. Puram Hobli (carved out of Survey No.34/2), prayed for a direction to BBMP Respondents 1 to 3, in particular the Assistant Revenue Officer of Ward No.25, to consider her representation dated 23-04-2026 (Annexure-A) for effecting the Khatha certificate of the schedule property in her name. She relied on this Court's earlier orders dated 10.12.2024 in W.P.No.3412/2024, disposed of on her memo recording a BBMP communication dated 27.06.2024 and her having furnished all documents to justify issuance of Khatha. Accepting the Standing Counsel's statement that Khatha requests are now processed under an online scheme — requiring an online application, with the case for 'A' or 'B' Khatha to be considered on the status of the documents filed — the Court disposed of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to apply online and to approach the Court if no action follows, furnishing the details of the online application.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:28537 WP No. 16740 of 2026

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 16740 OF 2026 (LB-BMP)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. JOY ESTHER CHANDRA D/O. LATE EBENESER, AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS RESIDING AT NO. 40, (OLD T-P. NO.911), 15^TH CROSS ROAD ST. THOMAS TOWN, DAVIS ROAD EXTENSION, SAGAYAPURAM, BENGALURU 560084.

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI. SHEKARAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER OF BBMP BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE, HUDSON CIRCLE, N.R. SQUARE, BENGALURU CITY -560001.

¶16

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:28537 WP No. 16740 of 2026

¶17

HC-KAR

¶18

THE JOINT COMMISSIONER, BRAHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE MAHADEVAPEVA, BENGALURU-560048

¶19

THE ASST. REVENUE OFFICER (A.R.O.) BRAHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE WARD NO.25, HORAMAVU, KOTHANUR, K.R. PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560 113.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. PAWAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶22

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN GENERAL AND RESPONDENT NO 3 IN PARTICULAR TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23-04-2026 VIDE ANNEXURE-A FOR EFFECTING KHATHA CERTIFICATE OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶25

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:28537 WP No. 16740 of 2026

¶26

HC-KAR

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

The petitioner asserts ownership of a site bearing No.17/1, H.L.No.362/9A of K.Narayanapura Village, K. R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, stating that this site is carved out of Survey No.34/2 of the same village. This property for convenience is referred to as the subject property. Mr. Shekarappa, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court must direct the respondents to consider the representations filed and issue Khatha and other revenue records.

¶29

The petitioner relies upon the orders of this Court dated 10.12.2024 in W.P.No.3412/2024. Mr. Pawan Kumar, the learned Standing counsel for the respondents who is called upon to accept notice, is heard for final disposal of the petition. This Court has disposed of the petition in W.P.No.3412/2024 on a memo filed by the petitioner stating that she was in receipt of a Communication dated 27.06.2024 calling

¶30

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:28537 WP No. 16740 of 2026

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

upon her to furnish all the documents and that she

¶34

has furnished all the documents to justify issuance of Khatha .

¶35

Mr. Pawan Kumar rightly points out that the

¶36

respondents are considering the request for Khatha based on an online scheme and that with the scheme in place, the petitioner must make an online application and based on the status of the documents filed, the petitioner's case for either 'A' or 'B' Khatha could be considered. This Court therefore disposes of this petition with liberty to the petitioner to make an online application and approach the Court if no action is taken in terms of the scheme furnishing the details of the application submitted online.

¶37

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶38

Smt. Joy Esther Chandra v. the Commissioner of Bbmp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Joy Esther Chandra v. the Commissioner of Bbmp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Vishal Singh (Owner of Goods), Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

The Commissioner Vs Sri Madesh N

M/S Hind Metals Vs Municipal Commissioner

M/S Megalith Ventures Private Limited Vs Sri B Ramaswamy

Sri. Prathap. S Vs the Greater Bengaluru Authority

Sri a Venkatesh Vs Greater Bengaluru Authority