Karnataka High Court
Krishnappa vs M/S Remco (Bhel) on 16 March, 2021
Author: Alok Aradhe Rangaswamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2021
PRESENT
R
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
WRIT APPEAL NO.2176 OF 2013 (LB-BMP)
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO.1960 OF 2013 (LB-BMP)
WRIT APPEAL NO.2174 OF 2013 (LB-BMP)
IN W.A.NO.2176/2013:
BETWEEN:
1. KRISHNAPPA
S/O LATE PENTAGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
2. C. NIRAJAN MURTHY
S/O LATE CHANDRANNA,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
3. MIRLE VARADARAJ
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
NO.544, 5TH MAIN,
KENGERI SATELLITE TOWN,
BANGALORE-560060.
4. N.R. NAGARAJ
S/O LATE RAME GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
2
HANUMANTHA NAGAR,
NELAMANE POST,
SRIRANGAPATTANA,
MANDYA DISTRICT.
5. R. MANJUNATH
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
NO.1174, PADUVANA ROAD,
I CROSS ROAD, IV STAGE,
T.K. LAYOUT, KUVEMPU NAGAR,
MYSORE-570022.
6. GIRIJA V. RAJ
D/O LATE RAME GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
HANUMANTHA NAGAR,
NELAMANE POST,
SRIRANGAPATTANA,
MANDYA DISTRICT.
7. ANJANAPPA
S/O LATE GALAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
8. V. NAGARAJ
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
NO.4, VADARAPALYA,
KENGERI POST,
BANGALORE-560060.
9. NOORURLLA SHARIEF
ALIAS MASTAN SHARIEFF,
19/D, J.P.NAGAR,
UMARBAGH LAYOUT,
BANGALORE-560078.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ASHOK HARNAHALLI, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI. J.C. KUMAR, ADV.,)
3
AND:
1. M/S REMCO (BHEL) HOUSE BUILDING
CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES LTD.,
NO.364, 5TH MAIN,
VIJAYANAGAR II STAGE,
BANGALORE-560040
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT,
SRI. SHANKAR G. BELLERY.
2. RAJU N. MORE
S/O NARAYAN MORE,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
NO.506, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
3. K. BALACHANDRAN
S/O KUNJUNNI NAIR,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
NO.29, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
4. NARAGINGA RAO
S/O KESHAVA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
NO.433/3, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
5. ANWER ALI KHAN
S/O KHADHAR,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
NO.529, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
4
6. ASHOK MALLAPPA MODI
S/O MALLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
NO.433/4, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
7. T. MANOHAR
S/O LATE T.S. PUTTASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
NO.456, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
8. MAHARUDRA KAMMAR
S/O DEVENDRAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
NO.502, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
9. G. SUDHA
W/O SRI. S. GURURAJ RAO,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
NO. 204, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
10 . R. KALAVATHY KUMAR
W/O SRI K.A. KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
NO.258, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
11. K.A. KUMAR
S/O M.K. ARMUGHAM,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
5
NO.259, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE SOUTH,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
12. KUBHEER J
S/O JAGANNATHA RAO,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 479, BHEL II LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
13. MANOHAR B. KULKARNI
S/O BINDU RAO,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 504, BHEL II LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
14. KARUNAGARAN
S/O NARASIMHAN,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 411, BHEL LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
15. MANJUNATHA KAMATH
S/O NARAYANA KAMATH,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT 349, BHEL LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
16. DILIP KUMARI JADHAV,
S/O APPASAHEB,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 549, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
6
BANGALORE-560098.
17 . DODDAMANI
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
S/O KASHAPPA,
R/AT 619 BHEL LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE560098
18. ANTHONY DAS
S/O CHINAPPA Y
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 643, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
19. MAHADEVAPPA V. TOTAD
S/O VEERANA GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 600, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
20. VIJAYABASKAR K.R.,
S/O RAMU K
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 518, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
21. PRAKESH DESAI
S/O DESAI K.B.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 213, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
22. NEELAKANTAPPA
S/O BASALINGAPPA
7
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 433/5, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
23. NAGARAJA R
S/O RAMALINGACHAR
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 247, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
24. DINNI N.L
S/O LAXMAN
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 92, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
25. MUKTAR SHARIEF
S/O SHARIEF M.D
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 543, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
26. JAGADEESH K
S/O KRISHNAMURTHY S
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 547, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
27. BASAVARAJ C. PYATI
S/O CHANNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 244, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
8
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
28. BALASUBRAMANYA
S/O RAMASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT 9A, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
29. NAVEETHAM T
W/O THALASINGAM K
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 488, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
30. MANJUNATH K.G
S/O GURUMURTHY K
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 448, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
31. RAJANNA K.Y.
S/O KRISHNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT 505, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
32. SANKARA SUBBU M
S/O MAYAK KOOTHAN S
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 174, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
9
33. RAMANATHAN B.V.
S/O VASATH S.N.
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT 72, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
34. JAYARAMAIAH M
S/O MALARAYAPPA J.S
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 498, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
35. SUDHAKARA SHETTY
S/O KORAGA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 326, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
36. SOMAIAH C.M
S/O MADAIAH C.S
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT 500, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
37. VASANTHA K
S/O RADAKRISHNA K
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT 21, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
38. BASKER RAO. S
S/O SATHYANARAYANA RAO A
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
10
R/AT 485, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
39. RANGARAO B.M.
S/O MANJUNATH D.S
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT 433/3, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
40. MANJULADEVI G
S/O GANGADHAR RAO D.N
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT 45, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
41. SUNDER RAJU S
S/O SUBRAMANI
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT 534, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
42. RANGASWAMY A.R.
S/O RANGUDHAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 336,BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
43. SREENIVAS MURTHY
S/O RAMACHANDRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT 274, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
11
BANGALORE-560098.
44. MUNIRAJ V
S/O VENKATARAYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT 484, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
45. MEENAKSHI S
S/O SHARANAPPA K.S.
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT 515, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
46. SYAM RESORIYA
S/O LOUS MARTIN
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 67, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
47. NARENDRA KUMAR
S/O SRINIVASMURTHY H.R.
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 489, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
48. SREESHA B.N.
S/O NARAYANA BN.
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT 138, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
12
49. RAGHU K
S/O KALIDASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT 621, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
50. LAXMAN BADIGER
S/O VEERAPPA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 571, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
51. SHANKAR G BELERI
S/O GURAPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 353, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
52. BHARATH KUMAR K
S/O KODANDA RAMA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT 615, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
53. MUTTAGI S.A.
S/O AVVANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/AT 25, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
54. LAKSHMIPATHI
S/O VENKATESAN,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
13
R/AT 24, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
55. ANJANEYA
S/O NAGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/AT 14, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
56. RATHNAMMA B
W/O MURTHY M.S.
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
R/AT 4, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
57. NAGARAJA DIKSHIT S
S/O SHAMANNA DIXITH
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/AT IB, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
58. JAYANTHI R
W/O RANGANATHAN
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT 75, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
59. SHANKARI M. KAMATH
S/O MANJUTH KAMATH
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT 39, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
14
BANGALORE-560098.
60. ASHOKA D
S/O DASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/AT 65, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
61. CHETTY K.C.
S/O CHANDRASHEKAR CHETTY,
R/AT 483, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
62. THERESA MARTIN A
W/O MARTIN,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT 433/6, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
63. SURESH G.J.
S/O GOPAL PILLAI
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/AT 495, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
64. NARAYANA M
S/O MARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT 468, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
65. SUDHINDRA .A.,
S/O APPAJAPPA,
15
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 554, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
66. MANJUNATHA V.S.
S/O SHASTRY V.S.S,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT 618, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
67. VIJAYAPRAKASH B
S/O BASAVARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 624, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
68. PATIL T.Y.
S/O PATIL Y.K.
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT 628, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
69. NATARAJ H.L.
S/O SHASTRY H.L.N.,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 558, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
70. BASAVARU A
S/O ANDANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT 433/16,BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
16
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
71. SHIVA SHANKAR V
S/O VEERASETTAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
R/AT 433/13, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
72. NARASHIMIAH
S/O NARASIMIAH,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT 603, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
73. VIRGINEA ROBERTS
W/O JAYATHEERTHA R.A.
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT 627, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
74. RADHA K.N.
W/O NANJAPPA K.A.
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT 519, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
75. NAGARAJU V
S/O VENKATARAM S
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT 522, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
17
76. SATHYA MURTHY H B
S/O BINDHU MADAV SASTRY,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
R/AT 591, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
77. SHANKAR H.R.
S/O RAMASWAMY H.R.
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT 508, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
78. TIMMAIAH B
S/O BYRATHIMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT 573, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
79. HUCHAIAH
S/O NANJE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT 433/15, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
80. SUMA B.T.
D/O THAMMAIAH B.R.
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT 252, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
81. SREENIVASA M
S/O MUNIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
18
R/AT 77, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
82. PANKAJAM O
W/O ACHUTHAN NAIR
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT 93, II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
83. RAVINDRA L
S/O LINGARADHYA,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT 510, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
84. PRABHAKARA M.V.
S/O RAO M.V.V.S.,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 6, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
85. LAKCHMAN A
S/O AMBIRATHNAM T.V.
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT 524, BHEL LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE- 560 098
86. NAGALAKSHMI
W/O VENKATARAMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT 270, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
19
BANGALORE-560098.
87. JAYARAM N
S/O NAGARAJ SETTY,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT 306, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
88. MAHALINGAPPA N
S/O NANJAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT 501, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
89. BHAGYALAKSHMI K
W/O GOPALAN T
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT 551, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
90. SRIRAM T.V.
S/O VAMANAN T.R.
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT 612, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
91. SURESH N
S/O NARAYANAN A
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/AT 352, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
20
92. RAJESHWARI K.N.
W/O BHATTA K.G.N
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT 533, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
93. RAGHURAM G.S.
S/O KRSHNAN G.D.S.
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT 562, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
94. BALAKRISHNAN A
S/O ANAMALAI M
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT 475, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
95. PREMAKUMARI G.S.
W/O ARUNACHALAMURHTY
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
R/AT 85, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
96. RAMESH BABU C.S.
S/O SIDDALINGA RAO
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT 310, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
97. JAGANATHA RAO
S/O NARAYANA RAO N.S.
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
21
R/AT 419, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
98. GAUTHAM SARKAR
S/O KALACHAND SARKAR
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT 340, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
99. GANAPATHY K.R.
S/O RAMAN K.R.
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT 635, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
100. DWARAKANATH
S/O KRISHNA IYER
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT 60, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
101. GOPALAKRISHNA K
S/O KAPINIPATHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT 563, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
102. VENKATESHALU K
S/O KRISHNAN S
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT 37, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
22
BANGALORE-560098.
103. KAMALA DEVI M.A.
D/O ASHWATHNARAYANA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT 433/7, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
104. HARISHKUMAR
S/O RAJANNA P.N.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT 136, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
105. KHALEEL KHAN
S/O MOOSA KHAN
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/AT 98, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
106. NAGARAJA A
S/O VENKATARANAGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT 597, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
107. GIRISH T.J.
S/O JAGADEESHA MURTHY T.S.
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT 523, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,,
BANGALORE-560098.
23
108. MAHESH
S/O VISHWANATH M.N.
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT 583, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
109. KESHAV
S/O CHINNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/AT 599, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
110. SAMPATH KUMAR
S/O SUBAIAH SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT 577, BHEL LAYOUT
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
111. SANTHOSH
S/O BALACHANDAR Y.N.
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/AT 622, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
112. DODDAIAH N
S/O NAGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT 426, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
113. MOHAN RAJ M
S/O MUNISWAMY
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
24
R/AT 8, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
114. CHANDRAMMA
W/O GANESH KULLAN,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT 237, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
115. SATEESH B.S.
S/O SUBRAYA BHAT K
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/AT 580, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
116. ARUN MUSHIGRI
S/O RAMACHANDRAIAH
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT 212, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
117. JAYARAMA R
S/O RAMU K
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 570, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
118. RAGHUNATH H.N.
S/O NARASIMHA MURTHY BHAT
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT 74/1, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
25
BANGALORE-560098.
119. SHIVAKUMAR H.C.
S/O CHENAPPA H.V.
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/AT 491, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
120. BAGALI Y.P.
S/O DASTAGEER PATEL,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 241, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
121. SATYAVATHI T.R.
W/O RAMAMURTHY T.G.
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT 62/1, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
122. BHEEMAPPA DASHYAL
S/O PARAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT 511, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
123. NANJAPPA
S/O MUNISWAMAPPA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/AT 631, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
26
124. JAGADISH G
S/O GIRIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT 587, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
125. SHAKUNTHALA
W/O SEETHARAMA IYER
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT 474, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
126. SHAMKUMAR S.B.
S/O BHAGWAN S
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT 626, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
127. VEERENDRA BHANU PRATAP
S/O CHINNAPPA T.L.
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT 134, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
128. MALLU P
S/O PUTAMALLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 557, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
129. RAGHURAMA REDDY N
S/O NARASIMIAH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
27
R/AT 560, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
130. SADAT U.K.
S/O KHAN A.B.
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT 4338, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
131. NAGARAJ RAO
S/O NARAYANA RAO N.S.
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
R/AT 639, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
132. BHASKAR
S/O SEETHARAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
R/AT 548, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
133. JAYAMMA
W/O CHIKKA VARAM
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT 649, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
134. MANJUNATH H
S/O NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT 598, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
28
BANGALORE-560098.
135. ANATHA RAMU C.G.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT 499, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
136. MAHADEVAPPA V. TOTAD
S/O SHETTY C
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT 109, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
137. RAMA MURTHY N
S/O NARASIMHALU NAIDU
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT 589, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
138. SUBRAMANI M
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
R/AT 647, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
139. PRAMILA M
W/O SUBRAMANI,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT 648, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
140. GOPALARAJU.V.R.
S/O RAJU N.V.,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
29
R/AT 527, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
141. KRISHNA PRASAD.B.R.
S/O RAJAGOPAL,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT 559, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
142. RAJANNA.N
S/O NAGAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT 410, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
143. RAVI.M.R.
S/O RAMASWAMIAH,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 7, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
144. FLORINE ANDRADE
S/O FELIDX MENEZES,
AGED ABOAUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT 175, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
145. KOMALA BASAVARAJU
W/O BASAVARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT 10, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
30
BANGALORE-560098.
146. SRINIVASA.B.S.
S/O SANJEEVAIAH.B.V.,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
R/AT 273, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
147. GIRISH T.J.
S/O JAGADEESHA MURTHY T.S.,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
R/AT 523, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
148. REVENDRA.K.A.,
S/O ANANTHA RAO.K.,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT 95, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
149. SHANTHAMMA B.N.
S/O PRABHU.S.,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT 542, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
150. UDAYAKUMARI.K
W/O AJITH K. VASUDEVAN,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 486, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
31
151. PRABHAKAR.K.S.
S/O SUBRAMANYA IYER K.B.,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 83, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
152. RAMU.M.V.
S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/AT 82, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
153. RAVINDRANATH.C.M.
S/O SHARMA C.V.M.,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 280, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
154. PARADKAR G.V.
S/O VASUDEV PARADKAR.V,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
R/AT 260, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
155. SUBRATHA KUMAR MANDAL,
S/O GURU PADA MANDAL,
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT 305, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
156. HALDAR.A
S/O SIHURANJAN HALDAR,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
32
R/AT 270, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
157 . DIWAKAR.M.L.
S/O RAJU.N.V.,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 125, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
158. NAGARAJ.K.
S/O KAPPINAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 26, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
159. ASHOK.D
S/O TATAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT 9, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
160. M.N.KOWSTHABHA
W/O NANDAKUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 73, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
161. SHIVASHANKARAYYA
S/O BASAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS,
R/AT 74, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
33
BANGALORE-560098.
162. SHIVEGOWDA
S/O LAXMAN GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
R/AT 71, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
163. MANJULA.K.C.
W/O MUDDARAJU.K.M.,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT 78, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
164. JALAJA.S
W/O SHESHADRI,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 586, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
165. JANAKAMMA.M.C.
W/O MUKUND,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT 588, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
166. GURUSHANTHAPPA,
S/O APPANAPPA,
AGED ABOAUT 62 YEARS,
R/AT 31, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
34
167. KRISHNA
S/O PUTTASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT 3, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
168. SANGAPPA B.G.,
S/O BASAVALINGAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 414, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
169. KUSUMAKAR SHETTY.V
S/O MANJAIAH.V,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
R/AT 601, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
170. PADMANABHA PUNJA
S/O P.S.PUNJA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
R/AT 602, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
171. SHAKILA S.SHETTY,
W/O SUNIL SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT 606, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
172. KANCHANA RAO
W/O ANUP RAO,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
35
R/AT 613, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
173. DAYANANDA SHETTY
S/O KUSHALA SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT 107, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
174. SHEKAR SHETTY.B.
S/O MANJAIAH SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
R/AT 393, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
175. NIRMALA SHETTY
D/O MUTHAIAH SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT 394, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
176. LAKSHMI.B.
W/O MANJAIAH SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
R/AT 395, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
177. CHARLOTTE MATHEW
W/O MATHEW,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/AT 397, BHEL II STAGE,
PATTANAGERE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
36
BANGALORE-560098.
178. THE BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE,
HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE,
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
179. ADDL. COMMISSIONER,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR SUB DIVISION,
BBMP, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE.
180. ASST. COMMISSIONER (REVENUE)
BBMP, HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE.
181. R.S.GANGADHARAIAH,
S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
182. BASARAJAPPA
S/O LATE PATEL NANJUNDAPPA,
OPP: DODDANNA VIDYA SAMSTHE,
SHILPA KRUPA,
SUNKADA KATTE,
VISWANEEDAM POST,
BANGALORE-560091.
183. CHANDRAKALA
W/O HEMANTH KUMAR,
NO.382, 9F MAIN ROAD,
VIJAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560040.
184. VENKATESH
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
185. NOORULLA SHARIEF
ALIAS MASTAN SHARIEFF, Transposed as Appellant
37
19/D, J.P.NAGAR, No.9 as per the order of
UMARBAGH LAYOUT, this Hon'ble Court
BANGALORE-560 O78. Dated 01.02.2021
186. T.B.JAYACHANDRA
M.L.A., SIRA CONSTITUENCY,
TUMKUR.
187. SMT.VIMALA GOWDA,
DEPUTY CHAIR PERSON,
M.L.C., BANGALORE.
188. K.V.RAMAIAH
S/O LATE SEENAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS,
NO.34, PANCHAVATI,
13TH CROSS, KETHMARANEHALLI,
I BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE-560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MADHUSUDAN R. NAIK, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADV., FOR R-1-R-6, R-7,
R-8-R-28, R-29, R-30 TO R-76, R-77, R-78 TO R84,
R-85, R-86 TO R156 & R-158 TO R-177
SRI. B.S. GAUTHAM, ADV., FOR R-178 TO R-180
SMT. LAKSHMY IYENGAR, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI. SHARATH S. GOWDA, ADV., FOR R-185
V/O DTD:5.11.2018 NOTICE TO R-181-183 & 188 ARE D/W)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.14665-14675/2012
(LB-BMP) DATED 13.02.2013.
IN W.A.NO.1960/2013:
BETWEEN:
SRI. P.B.VIJAYASHANKAR
S/O LT. BASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
38
R/A BASAPPA BUILDING,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560098.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. R.S. RAVI, ADV.,)
AND:
1. M/S. REMCO (BHEL)
HOUSE BUILDING
CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,
NO.364, 5TH MAIN,
RPC LAYOUT,
VIJAYANAGAR 2ND STAGE,
BANGALORE-560040.
2. G. RAVISHANKAR
S/O V.K. GOPAL
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
NO.295, FM CARIAPPA ROAD
BHEL LAYOUT,
PATTANAGERE NORTH,
BANGALORE-560098.
3. N.L. MANJUNATHA SHETTY
S/O ANANTARAMA GUPTA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
NO.17, 1ST MAIN ROAD
12TH CROSS, MTS LAYOUT,
KENGERI UPANAGARA,
BANGALORE-560060.
4. C. VINAYAK
S/O CHANNASWAMY MUDALIAR
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
NO.28A, 3RD BLOCK, 7TH CROSS,
GRAPE GARDEN,
THYAGARAJANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560028.
5. L. PEETER D'SOUZA
S/O LATE LALLIS D'SOUZA
39
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/A NO.437, BAPUJINAGAR
MYSORE ROAD
BANGALROE-560026.
6. EJAZ PASHA
S/O SHEIK MUSTAFA
AGED MAJOR
R/A NO.344, 1ST MAIN,
2ND CROSS, GANGONDANAHALLI
MYSORE ROAD
BANGALORE-560039.
7. BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER
HUDSON CIRCLE
BANGALORE-560002.
8. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER
RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR SUB DIVISION
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560098.
9. P.S. MAHALINGAPPA
S/O LT. SIDDARAMAIAH
AGED MAJOR
R/A PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560098.
10. SMT. K.B. SHANTAMMA
W/O P.S. MAHALINGAPPA
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE
KENGERI HOBLI
BANGALORE-560098
11. SRI. M.R. KANTHARAJU
S/O NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
C/O VIJAYAKUMAR
R/A NO.17, SIDDHARAMAIAH BUILDING,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
40
BANGALORE-560098.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MADHUSUDAN R. NAIK, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADV., FOR C/R-1
AND ALSO FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2, 4 & 5;
NOTICE SERVED ON RESPONDENTS NO.3 & 6;
SRI. S.N. PRASHANTH CHANDRA, ADV., FOR
RESPONDENTS NO.7 & 8;
SRI. MANMOHAN P.N., ADV., FOR
RESPONDENTS NO.9 & 10;
SRI. H.T. JAGANNATHA, ADV., FOR RESPONDENT NO.11)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.21920/2010
DATED 13.02.2013.
W.A.NO.2174/2013:
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. P.S. MAHALINGAPPA
S/O LATE SIDDRAMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE
KENGERI HOBLI
BANGALORE-560098
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR's
1(a) USHA
D/O LATE SRI. P.S. MAHALINGAPPA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560098
1(b) NAVEEN KUMAR
S/O LATE SRI. P.S. MAHALINGAPPA
41
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE
KENGERI HOBLI,
BANGALORE-560098
2. SMT. K.B. SHANTHAMMA
W/O P.S. MAHALINGPPA
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
R/AT PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
KENGERI HOBLI
BANGALORE-560098.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. MANMOHAN P.N. ADV., FOR A1(A&B))
AND:
1. M/S REMCO (BHEL)
HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED
NO.364, 5TH MAIN,
R.P.C. LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR
2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560040
2. SRI. G. RAVISHANKAR
S/O V.K. GOPAL
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS
NO.295, FM CARIAPPA ROAD,
BHEL LAYOUT, PATTANAGERE NORTH,
BANGALORE-560098.
3. SRI. N.L. MANJUNATH SHETTY
S/O ANANTARAMA GUPTA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
NO.17, 1ST MAIN ROAD
12TH CROSS, MTS LAYOUT
KENGERI UPANAGARA,
BANGALORE-560060.
4. SRI. C. VINAYAK
S/O CHANNASWAMY MUDALIAR
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
NO.28A, 3RD BLOCK, 7TH CROSS
GRAPE GARDEN, THYAGARAJANAGAR
42
BANGALORE-560028.
5. SRI. L. PETER D'SOUZA
S/O LATE LALLIS D'SOUZA
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
NO.437, BAPUJINAGAR
MYSORE ROAD,
BANGALORE-560026.
6. SRI. EJAZ PASHA
S/O SHEIK MUSTAFA
NO.344, 1ST MAIN
2ND CROSS, GANGONANAHALLI
MYSORE ROAD
BANGALORE-560039.
7. THE BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
REPRESENTED BY ITS
COMMISSIONER,
HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE
8. THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER
RAJARJESHWARI NAGAR SUB-DIVISION,
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
BANGALORE.
9. SRI. M.R. KANTHARAJU
FATHER NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN
C/O VIJAYAKUMAR
R/AT NO.17, SIDDHARAMAIAH BUILDING,
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE,
KENGERI HOBLI
BANGALORE-560098
10. SRI. P.B. VIJAYASHANKAR
S/O LATE BASAPPA
AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE APPELLANTS,
R/AT BASAPPA BUILDING
PATTANAGERE VILLAGE
KENGERI VILLAGE,
KENGERI HOBLI
43
BANGALORE-560098.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MADHUSUDAN R. NAIK, SENIOR ADV., FOR
SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADV., FOR C/R1 AND ALSO
FOR R-2 & R-6
SRI. S.N.PRASHANTHCHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENTS NO.7 & 8;
NOTICE SERVED ON RESPONDENTS NO.9 & 10)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.21920/2010
DATED 13.02.2013.
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR JUDGMENT ON 26.02.2021, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J.,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
In these intra court appeals filed under Section 4
of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, the appellants
have assailed the order dated 13.02.2013 passed by
the learned Single Judge in writ petitions, from which
these appeals emanate. The learned Single Judge by
the aforesaid order has quashed the order dated
19.04.2010 and 05.04.2012 passed by Additional
Commissioner Bruhath, Bengaluru Municipal
Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'BBMP' for
short) in exercise of powers under Section 114A of
Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). In order
to appreciate the appellant's challenge to the order
passed by the learned Single Judge, few relevant facts
need mention, which are stated infra.
FACTS
2. The lands measuring 60 acres comprised in
Survey numbers 2/1B, 2/1C, 2/4, 17/2, 18/1, 20/2,
20/3, 20/4,20/6, 20/7, 20/10, 20/11, 20/12, 21, 22,
23, 24/4, 24/5, 42/2a, 42/3a, 42/3b, 48/1, 48/2,
52/1, 52/2 situate at Pattanagera Village, Kengeri
Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk were required for the
purpose of allotment of sites to members of REMCO
House Building Coop. Society Ltd. (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Society' for short). Thereupon,
proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act' for short)
were initiated and a Notification under Section 4(1) of
the 1894 Act, was issued on 16.05.1985, which was
followed by a declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act
dated 03.10.1987. The aforesaid acquisition
proceedings were challenged and were quashed by a
division bench of this court vide order dated
18.06.1991 in 'NARAYANA REDDY V. STATE OF
KARNATAKA', I.L.R. 1991 KAR 2248. The aforesaid
decision was affirmed by Supreme Court vide
judgment dated 21.02.1995 passed in batch of
appeals ['H.M.T. HOUSE BUILDING CO-
OPERATIVE SOCIETY V. SYED KHADER', I.L.R.
1995 KAR 1962 (SC)] and a direction was issued
that possession of the land shall be restored to the
respective land owners irrespective of the fact
whether they had challenged the acquisition of their
lands or not and a further direction was also issued to
land owners to refund the amount received by them
as compensation or otherwise in respect of their lands
and the parties to the Special Leave Petition as well as
all concerned persons were directed to implement the
directions issued at an early date.
3. Between a period from 21.08.1997 to
06.03.1998 on various dates namely 07.08.1997,
28.08.1997, 03.09.1997, 20.11.2007, and
06.03.1998, the Special Land Acquisition Officer
handed over the possession of the lands in question.
It appears that some of the land owners had entered
into an agreement dated 10.11.2000 with the Society,
under which they agreed to ratify the past transaction
and the transaction entered into between the Society
and its members, the aforesaid agreement pertains to
land bearing Survey No.17/2 (measuring 2 acres and
17 guntas), Survey No.42/4 (1.02 acres), Survey
No.42/4 (0.20 acres), Survey No.21 (totally 5.24
acres, 5.22 acres, 5.22 acres, 5.22 acres, 5.22 acres,
5.22 acres, 5.22 acres, 5.22 acres, 5.22 acres, 0.20
acres). It was averred in the writ petition that some of
the allotees who were allotted sites by the Society had
constructed the houses on the sites and khatha of the
said properties were made in their respective names
by the then City Municipal Corporation, Rajrajeshwari
Nagar. Later on, the area in which the aforesaid sites
were situate brought within limits of BBMP and
Khathas, which was recorded in the name of allotees
continued in their name. It was further averred that
since, the ratification deed revived the past
transactions, the Power Of Attorney executed by the
land owners in favour of the Society was also revived.
4. It was further averred that Society had filed
suits viz., O.S.No.4602/2000, O.S.No.5470/2002 and
O.S.No.17125/2006 against the owners of the land on
the basis of ratification agreement in which a
compromise decree was passed on 06.09.2000,
12.06.2006 and 09.11.2006 respectively. In the
petition for compromise filed in the aforesaid civil
suits, a reference was made to ratification deed dated
10.11.2000. It was pleaded that the persons who lost
their land had filed contempt petitions viz., Contempt
Petition Nos.224-226/2005, in which an averment was
made that direction to restore the possession of the
land to the owners of the land was not complied with.
The Society, in the aforesaid contempt proceeding
filed an affidavit, in which inter alia it was stated that
Society had entered into private negotiation with the
owners of the land and additional money was paid to
the owners of the land and sites were allotted to
them. The Supreme Court thereupon dropped the
contempt proceeding.
5. The Commissioner of Rajarajeshwari Nagar
thereafter, a member of legislative assembly
addressed a letter dated 22.06.2006 to the Minister
for Revenue and sought directions to implement the
order passed by the Supreme Court. Thereafter,
notices dated 25.08.2006, 03.09.2006 and
08.09.2006 were issued by Rajrajeshwari Nagar
Municipal Council to show cause as to why Khatha
made in favour of purchasers/allotees of the sites be
not cancelled. Thereafter in a writ petition viz.,
W.P.No.13168/2006 learned Single Judge of this court
by an order dated 12.03.2007 remitted the matter to
incumbent BBMP to consider all the aspects of the
matter and to pass an order in accordance with law.
The Additional Commissioner BBMP by an order dated
07.08.2007 passed under Section 114-A of the Act
cancelled the Khathas in respect of four sites and held
that the order would operate in respect of those sites
where the land owner had not entered into a
subsequent transaction and in cases where the decree
was not passed. The Additional Commissioner BBMP
passed orders dated 19.04.2010 and 05.04.2012
under Section 114-A of the Act, by which Khathas
which stood in the name of the allotees were
cancelled. The aforesaid orders were assailed in writ
petition before the learned Single Judge.
6. The learned Single Judge by an order dated
13.02.2013 inter alia held as follows
i) That Supreme Court did not take any
exception to the ratification deed
executed between the owners of the
land and the Society and dropped the
contempt proceeding as order passed
by it was complied.
ii) The Supreme Court permitted the
Society to enter into private
transactions with the owners of the
land so as to secure the interests of the
allotees of the sites and in compliance
thereto the society had entered into a
ratification deed dated 10.11.2010
under which the owners of the land
agreed to revive the rights of the
Society and its allotees.
iii) The Additional Commissioner BBMP
could not adjudicate the issue with
regard to validity of ratification deed.
iv) The Compromise decree passed by the
court was required to be set aside in
the manner known to law and merely
because owners of the land described
the compromise decree as fraudulent
the same could not be said to be so.
v) The Additional Commissioner BBMP
could not sit in judgment over the
validity of compromise decree.
vi) The issues raised by owners of the land
before Additional Commissioner BBMP
were essentially issues of fact which
could be adjudicated in a civil suit and
therefore cancellation of khathas at the
behest of land owners was held to be
unjust and improper.
vii) The validity of the ratification deed
cannot be examined in writ
proceedings and the validity of private
negotiations between the land owners
and society cannot be considered in
proceeding under article 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India.
viii) The power under section 114-A of the
Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act,
1976 has been exercised beyond the
period of limitation i.e. 3 years.
ix) Revocation of khatha by invoking
powers under Section 114-A of the Act
would amount to implementation of the
order passed by the Supreme Court.
7. The learned single judge quashed the
orders dated 19.04.2010 and 05.04.2012 passed by
BBMP. However, liberty was reserved to the land
owners to approach the revenue authorities again for
seeking necessary orders depending upon the rights of
the parties which may be determined by the
appropriate forum. In the aforesaid factual backdrop
these appeals have been filed.
SUBMISSIONS:-
8. Learned Senior counsel for the appellant in
W.A.No.2176/2013 submitted that most of the civil
suits filed by the allotees against the owners of the
land were dismissed and some of the first appeals
filed before this court were also disposed of. It is
pointed out that appellants in W.A.Nos.2176-
2185/2013 and W.A.Nos.2664-4833/2013 have a
claim in respect of the following lands:
Sl.No. Survey No. Extent of land
1. 21/3 & 21/4 3 acres 15 guntas
2. 17/1A2 & 17/1A4 18 guntas
3. 42/4 26 guntas
4. 2/4 20 guntas
5. 24/2 18 guntas
6. 42/4 17 guntas
7. 42/3A 10 guntas
8. 24/1 7 guntas
9. 24/4 1 acre 4 guntas
10. 17/6 20 guntas
It is also pointed out that except land bearing
Survey Nos.21/3, 21/4 and 42/4 measuring 1 acre
and 3 guntas, other lands are not subject matter of
any ratification deed or any litigation and therefore,
there is no impediment to restore the Khatha of the
properties in Survey Nos.17/1A2, 2/4, 24/2, 42/3A,
24/1, 24/4 and 17/16. It is further submitted that the
Society fraudulently got executed a ratification deed
from the owners of the land with a view to overcome
the effect of order of the Supreme Court. It is also
submitted that civil suits namely
O.S.Nos.15571/2004, 16366/2005 and 5471/2002
were compromised with an intention to play fraud. It
is also pointed out that said suits filed by the Society
against owners of the land were compromised by the
office bearer of the Society on behalf of the land
owners who claimed to be the Power Of Attorney
holders of the land. It is contended that neither the
ratification deed nor the compromise decree were
registered as required under the law and therefore, no
sanctity in law can be attached to them. It is further
contended that once Supreme Court has quashed the
land acquisition proceedings and had directed for re-
delivery of possession to owners of the land, the
Society had lost all rights in the property. It is also
contended that Society cannot claim title in respect of
the lands in question on the basis of ratification deed
and the Additional Commissioner, BBMP rightly held
that aforesaid documents are not valid. It is further
urged that ratification deed does not confer title in
respect of land in question and the Supreme Court
while quashing the land acquisition proceedings did
not permit the Society to enter into private transaction
with the owners of the land and finding in this regard
recorded by the learned Single Judge is factually
incorrect. In support of aforesaid submissions,
reliance was placed on decisions of Supreme Court in
'BHOOP SINGH VS. RAM SINGH MAJOR AND
OTHERS', (1995) 5 SCC 709, 'K.B.SAHA AND
SONS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. DEVELOPMENT
CONSULTANT LIMITED', (2008) 8 SCC 564,
'K.RAGHUNANDAN AND OTHERS VS. ALI
HUSSAIN SABIR AND OTHERS', (2008) 13 SCC
102, 'RITESH TEWARI AND ANR. VS. STATEOF
U.P. AND ORS.', AIR 2010 SC 3823, 'SURAJ LAMP
AND INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED (2)
THROUGH DIRECTOR VS. STATE OF HARYANA
AND ANOTHER', (2012) 1 SCC 656 and division
bench decision of this court in
'S.C.GANGADHARIAAH VS. REMCO, LAWS (KAR)',
(2018) (1) 172.
9. Learned Senior counsel for the appellants
in W.A.Nos.1960-1965/2013 argued that ratification
deed dated 10.11.2000 and compromise decrees are
not binding on the rights of the appellants in aforesaid
writ appeals. It is also urged that ratification deed
dated 10.11.2000 was executed by one Siddamma
and her children and not by the appellants and
therefore, the decree is not binding on the appellants
in the said writ appeals. It is further urged that the
suit was filed by the President of the Society on
07.11.2006, whereas, the caveat was filed by the
Secretary of the Society on 31.10.2006, which
eventually led to passing of a compromise decree on
09.11.2006. It is therefore, argued that the aforesaid
compromise decree, which was result of collusion on
behalf of the Society is void. It is pointed out the
learned Single Judge erred in holding that validity of
ratification deed and compromise decree can be
examined by the civil court, but simultaneously set
aside the impugned orders, which were based on
ratification deed and compromise decrees. It is
contended that the finding recorded by the learned
Single Judge that transaction entered into by the
aforesaid Siddamma binds everybody is illegal as
there was no material on record to set up the
relationship of the appellants with Siddamma. It is
also contended that Khathas in name of allotees were
based on sale deed executed by the Society pursuant
to acquisition of land by the government and once the
acquisition was quashed the Khathas have to be
recorded in the name of the appellants who were
owners of the land. It is also argued that Society has
no locus standi to file the writ petition. In support of
aforesaid submissions reliance has been placed on
decisions in 'H.M.T.HOUSE BUILDING CO-OP.
SOCIETY VS. SYED KHADER & ORS.', (1995) 2
SCC 677, 'TARSEM SINGH PETITIONER VS.
SUKHMINDER SINGH', AIR 1998 SC 1400, 'GRAM
PANCHAYAT OF VILLAGE NAULAKHA VS. UJAGAR
SINGH AND OTHERS', AIR 2000 SC 3272,
'VYALIKAVAL HOUSE BUILDING CO-ORIGINAL
PETITIONER SOCIETY VS. CHANDRAPPA AND
ORS', AIR 2007 SC 1151, 'K.B.SAHA AND SONS
PRIVATE LIMITED VS. DEVELOPMENT
CONSULTANT LIMITED', (2008) 8 SCC 564,
'RITESH TEWARI AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF
UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS', (2010) 10 SCC
677, 'SURAJ LAMP AND INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.
Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.', AIR 2012 SC
206, 'BANGALORE CITY COOPERATIVE HOUSING
SOCIETY LIMITED VS. STATEOF KARNATAKA
AND OTHERS', (2012) 3 SCC 727 and decision of
this court in 'SRI.CHANDRASHEKAR AND OTHERS
VS. THE TUHEED CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING
SOCIETY (REGD.) AND OTHERS', I.L.R. 2008 KAR
4003.
10. Learned counsel for respondent No.185
whose transposition as appellant in
W.A.No.2176/2013, was not opposed by the
appellant, submitted that Supreme Court had in
categorical terms issued a direction to restore the
possession of the land to the owners irrespective of
the fact whether they had challenged the acquisition
or not and a further direction was issued for
restoration of possession to owners of the land and
they were directed to refund the amount received by
them as compensation. It is pointed out that the
Supreme Court did not grant any liberty to the Society
to negotiate with owners of the land and the finding
recorded by the learned Single Judge in this regard is
factually incorrect. It is also urged that the process of
continuing the Khathas in the names of allotees
amounts to contempt and this court should permit the
same. It is also pointed out that ratification deed is in
respect of 42 acres and 20 guntas, whereas, the
learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition in
respect of Khatha of properties within 60 acres of land
and the ratification deed was got executed
fraudulently. It is also pointed out that a private
complaint was filed in this regard, which was referred
for investigation and jurisdictional police have filed a
charge sheet for offences under Sections 418, 465,
471, 419, 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian
Penal Code. It is also pointed out that the State
Government in its order held that sale deed executed
by the Society after quashment of land acquisition
proceedings have no legal sanctity. It is also urged
that the Society has got compromise decree by
playing fraud and Power Of Attorney relied on to
record a compromise in civil suits has not been placed
on record in these proceedings. It is also contended
that Society could not act upon the Power Of Attorney,
which was obtained prior to land acquisition
proceeding, which were quashed by the Supreme
Court.
11. Learned Senior counsel for Society
submitted that learned Single Judge correctly
relegated the parties to explore the remedies before
the appropriate forum instead of contesting the claim
with regard to entries made in the Khathas recorded
by BBMP in the names of allotees. It is further
submitted that claim of owner of the land that the
ratification deed and compromise decree obtained by
the Society were fraudulent is based on surmises and
conjectures and in any case, the question with regard
to validity of ratification deed and compromise decrees
could not have been determined by Additional
Commissioner of BBMP. It is also pointed that Society
had already formed the layout by the time the land
acquisition proceedings were quashed by the Supreme
Court and many of the owners of the land had
approached the Society for settlement and had
received substantial sums of money towards
settlement of their claims. It is further pointed out
with reference to Annexures E1 to E5 that after the
judgment of the Supreme Court, the owners of the
land of survey No.2/3 had entered into a settlement
with the Society and under the terms of the
settlement sites were allotted to family members of
the owners of the land free of cost. Similarly the
owners of survey Nos. 52/11, 2/2, 52/6, 25/2 had
executed the ratification deed and had collected
further sums of money.
12. It is urged that suits filed by the Society
against owners of the land namely
O.S.No.17125/2006, O.S.No.5471/2002 and
O.S.No.4602/2000 in relation to Survey Nos.24/4,
52/11, 52/6 and 2/2 respectively were decreed. It is
also pointed out that in the contempt proceeding the
Society had brought to the notice of the Supreme
Court that in compliance of orders passed by it the
possession of the property was redelivered to the
owners of the land and further payments were made
towards consideration of the lands and owners had
executed ratification deed. Thereupon, the Supreme
Court dropped the proceedings for contempt which in
unmistakable terms indicate that there is no violation
of the order passed by the Supreme Court. It is also
urged that previously the Additional Commissioner,
BBMP had refused to cancel the Khathas on
17.08.2007, which was illegal. Our attention was also
invited to the fact that proceedings under Section
114-A of the Act were initiated at the instance of the
member of legislative assembly and therefore, the
learned Single Judge rightly directed the parties to
avail the remedies before appropriate forum. It is also
pointed out that learned Single Judge rightly held that
powers under Section 114-A of the Act could not be
invoked beyond a period of 3 years. It is also
contended that Khatha is for limited purpose of
identifying the person who is responsible for payment
of property tax and therefore, land owners had to
establish their claim with regard to title before the
Civil Court. It is also submitted that the appeals are
not maintainable as learned Single Judge has
exercised powers of supervision under Article 227 of
the Constitution of India. In this regard, reliance has
been placed in full bench decision of this court IN
'SMT. JAYAMMA V. STATE OF KARNATAKA', I.LR.
2020 KAR 1449.
13. Learned counsel for allotees while adopting
the submissions made by learned senior counsel for
the Society argued that on the basis of allotments
made in favour of the allotees by the Society, the
name of the allotees have been entered in khathas. It
is further submitted that after a lapse of 12 years, at
the instance of member of legislative assembly, the
proceedings were initiated to enforce the judgment of
the Supreme Court. It is also pointed out that
Revenue Minister had also issued a direction to take
suitable action. It is also urged that unless the
findings recorded by Principal Secretary, Revenue
Department are held to be bad, the appeal at the
instance of the appellants cannot be entertained. It is
also pointed out that in any case, appellants are not
interested in respect of all 482 sites cannot seek the
relief of setting aside the order passed by the learned
Single Judge in this appeal. It is also pointed out that
land owners had received the consideration and had
entered into agreements to part with possession of
their lands for formation of the layout and handed
over the possession of the lands to the society. It is
further pointed out that on the basis of ratification
deed, the civil court had passed the decree and till
today the appellants have not raised a contention
neither before any authority nor court that they had
not executed ratification deed and the power of
attorney. It is also pointed out that the stand of the
appellants that decree is collusive and has been
obtained by playing fraud has to be ignored as the
aforesaid contention was elaborated in O.S. No.
5471/2002. It is also argued that question of title
cannot be adjudicated under section 114-A of the Act,
more so when the property is conveyed under
registered instrument and the rights in the property
shall be deemed to have been transferred to the
purchaser. In support of aforesaid submissions
reliance has been placed on T.V.R. SUBBU CHETTY'S
FAMILY CHARITIES VS. M.RAGHAVENDRA
MUDALIAR & OTHERS, AIR 1961 SC 797,
PRAKASH NARAIAN SHARMA VS. BURMAN SHELL
CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD., (2002)
7 SCC 46, SOM DEV & OTHERS VS. RATI RAM
AND ANOTHER, (2006) 10 SCC 788, JAI
JAGANATH GASES PVT. LTD. VS. COMMERCIAL
TAX OFFICER, SANGAREDDY CIRCLE, MANJEERA
PIPELINE ROAD, MEDAK AND ANOTHER, (2009)
2 ALPJ HC 147, P.K.SINGH VS. S.N.KANUNGO &
OTHERS, (2010) 4 SCC 504, SHANTHI BUDHIYA
VESTA PATEL VS. NIRMALA JAYAPRAKASH
TIWARI, (2010) 5 SCC 104, RAJANNA VS. S.R.
VENKATASWAMY & OTHERS, (2014) 15 SCC 471,
VEDPAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS VS. PREMADEVI
(DEAD) THROUGH LRS., (2018) 9 SCC 496 and
MOHAMMED YUSUF VS. RAJKUMAR, AIR 2020 SC
976 as well as order passed in KEMPATTIGOWDA
ETC. VS. K.C.ASWATHANARAYANA SETTY dated
10.02.2020 passed in SLP (civil) diary no. 2854 of
2020 and judgment of this court in RFA No.
398/2012 dated 24.09.2019.
ANALYSIS:-
14. We have considered the rival submissions
made on both sides and have perused the record.
Admittedly proceedings for acquisition of the land
measuring 60 acres were initiated for the benefit of
the Society which were quashed by the Supreme
Court vide judgment dated 21.02.1995 with the
following directions:
"In the Appeal Nos.3011-19/95
arising out of SLP(C) Nos.11482-90 of
1991, after the dismissal of the appeals a
direction has been given that as a result
of the quashing of the land acquisition
proceedings including the Notifications in
question, the possession of the land shall
be restored to the respective land owners
irrespective of the fact whether they had
challenged the acquisition of their lands or
not. A further direction has been given
that on restoration of the possession to
the land owners, they shall refund the
amounts received by them as
compensation or otherwise in respect of
their lands. We issue a similar direction
even in this case. The petitioner, the
respondents and the State Government
including all concerned
authorities/persons shall implement the
aforesaid directions at an early date."
15. Thus it is evident that Supreme Court did
not grant the liberty to parties to re-negotiate the
matter. Therefore, the finding recorded by the learned
single judge in this regard that Supreme Court had
granted the liberty to re-negotiate the matter cannot
be upheld. However, it is worth mentioning that
nothing in law prevented the parties from entering
into negotiations.
16. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to
take note of well settled legal principles for exercise of
statutory powers. It is a well settled legal proposition
that when the statute confers the power coupled with
the duty to exercise the power, the condition
precedent for invocation of the power has to be
fulfilled [See 'MOHD. HASNUDDIN V. STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA', (1979) 2 SCC 572 AND
'CHARLES K. SKARIA V. V C. MATHEW (DR)',
(1980) 2 SCC 752]. It is well settled in law that if
the statute prescribed the manner of doing a
particular thing in a particular way, that thing has to
be done in that particular manner alone and all other
mode of its performance are necessarily forbidden
[See: 'MACQUARIE BANK V. SHILPI CABLE
TECHNOLOGIES LTD., (2018) 2 SCC 674, SURAT
SINGH V. SIRA BHAGWAN, (2018) 4 SCC 562
AND NARESHBHAI BHAGUBHAI V. UNION OF
INDIA, (2019) 15 SCC 1].
17. It is well settled that entries are made in
the register of the corporation for the limited purpose
of ascertaining the liability to pay tax and does not
confer any title. Now we may take note of section
114-A of the Act, which is reproduced below for the
facility of reference:
114A. Review by the Commissioner. -
Where the Commissioner, either suo motu or
otherwise, after such enquiry as he
considers necessary is satisfied that any
transfer of title under section 114 was got
recorded in the Corporation register by
fraud, misrepresentation, or suppression of
facts or by furnishing false, incorrect or
incomplete material, he may within a period
of three years from the date of such
recording of transfer of title reopen the case
and pass such order with respect thereto as
he thinks fit:
Provided that no such order shall be
made except after giving the person likely to
be affected thereby a reasonable opportunity
of being heard.
18. Thus from perusal of section 114-A of the
Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, it is evident that
the power of review can be exercised subject to
fulfillment of following conditions:
i) The Commissioner arrives at the
satisfaction either suo moto or otherwise
after such inquiry which he considers
necessary.
ii) Transfer of title under section 114-A of
the Act was got recorded in the corporation
register by fraud, misrepresentation or
suppression or by furnishing false, incorrect
or incomplete material.
iii) Power has to be exercised within a
period of 3 years from the date of
recording of transfer of the title.
19. Now we may advert to the impugned orders
dated 19.04.2010 and 05.04.2012 passed by the
Additional Commissioner in purported exercise of
powers under section 114-A of the Act. From close
scrutiny of aforesaid orders it is evident that the
proceedings under section 114-A have been initiated
in view of direction contained in the communication
issued by Principal Secretary to the Government as
well as Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore
dated 16.02.2006 and 07.02.2007 respectively. The
aforesaid orders have been passed on the ground that
the layout plan prepared by the Society has not been
approved by the competent authority and the layout
has been illegally developed as well as the sites have
been illegally allotted and conversion fee, and
betterment charges have not been paid. In other
words, no finding has been recorded that transfer of
title was either made by fraud, misrepresentation, or
suppression of facts or by furnishing false, incorrect or
incomplete material. Thus, the condition precedent for
invocation of power under section 114-A of the Act
has not been fulfilled. Admittedly, the power under
section 114-A of the Act has not been exercised within
a period of 3 years from the date of recording of
transfer of title. Therefore, the orders passed under
section 114-A of the Act cannot be sustained in the
eye of law, on this ground alone and therefore, it is
not necessary for us to examine other grounds of
challenge in the aforesaid orders. Thus, the aforesaid
orders have rightly been quashed by the learned
single judge.
20. It is well settled in law that this court in
exercise of power under article 226 of the Constitution
of India cannot determine the question of title [See:
'STATE OF RAJASHTHAN VS. BHAWANI SINGH',
(1993) SUPP 1 SCC 306 and 'ANAMALLAI CLUB
VS. GOVERNMENT OF T.N. AND OTHERS,
G.SRINIVAS VS. GOVT. OF A.P. AND OTHERS,
AIR 1997 SC 3650 and AIR 2005 SC 4455]
Therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly
relegated the parties to avail of the remedies in
respect of right title or interest, pertaining to lands in
question before the appropriate forum. However, the
orders dated 19.04.2010 and 05.04.2012 have been
quashed in its entirety. Therefore, we hold that the
aforesaid orders are quashed to the extent of interest
held by the appellants before us. The remaining lands
which are neither subject matter of any ratification
agreement or any civil suit would not be affected by
this order and its owners shall be free to use the same
in accordance with law. Needless to state that it will
be open to the parties to work out their remedies in
relation to their claim of right, title or interest in
respect of lands in question before the appropriate
forum and such forum shall deal with the claim of the
parties without being influenced by any of the
observations made either by learned single judge or in
this order. It is clarified that we have not expressed
any opinion with regard to right title or interest of the
parties in respect of lands in question as the aforesaid
question has to be adjudicated in an appropriate
forum. However, the Additional Commissioner BBMP is
also granted the liberty to hold an inquiry and to
ascertain the number of sites carved out of each of
survey members with the assistance of officers of
Revenue Department and to ascertain as to how many
existing Khatedars have paid property tax in respect
of properties which are registered and if property tax
has not been paid, then to proceed to recover the
same in accordance with law.
In view of preceding analysis, the order of
learned single judge is modified to the extent
mentioned above.
In the result, the appeals are disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KGR/SS
