Karnataka High Court
Smt.Mallamma vs The Chief Executive Officer on 14 January, 2022
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO.6866/2020 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT.MALLAMMA
W/O C.B.CHOUDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
R/O GOLLAHARAHALLI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT -577 552 ..PETITIONER
(BY SRI.V.S.RAVINDRA HOLLA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT
DAVANGERE -577002
2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUK PANCHAYATH
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANGERE DISTRICT -577213
3. THE PANCHAYATH DEVELOPMENT
OFFICER,
GRAM PRANCHAYATH
BELLEGANUDU,
CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
DAVANGERE DISTRICT -577552.
4. K.S.MALLIKARJUNA
S/O KARIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
-2-
R/O GOLLARAHALLI VILLAGE
BELLIGANADU POST,
CHENNAGIRI TQ
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577522 ..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.J.M.ANIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2,
SRI.N.R.JAGADEESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3,
SRI.S.B.HALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R-4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE
WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED
20.08.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE
ANNEXURE-F. ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MADAMUS
DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.3 TO IMPLEMENT THE
JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE LEARNED ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE,
CHANNAGIRI IN O.S.NO.131/2015 DATED 11.06.2018 AND TO
ISSUE LICENSE TO THE PETITIONER FOR CONSTRUCTING
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON THE SITE ALLOTTED IN HER
FAVOUR BEARING SITE NO.58, MEASURING 30FTX40FT,
SITUATED AT GOLLARAHALLI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK,
DAVANGERE DISTRICT.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner who was allotted a site by respondents
1 to 3 filed an application with the respondents 1 to 3 to
issue license to construct house on the site allotted to her.
Since, the respondents 1 to 3 refused to issue license to
the petitioner, the petitioner was constrained to file a
suit in O.S.No.131/2015 seeking declaration that she is
the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the
site in question and also to issue direction to the
respondent No.3 for issuing license to enable the petitioner
to put up the construction on the site in question. Said
suit came to be decreed on 11.06.2018 and in pursuance
of the same, petitioner submitted application with
respondents 1 to 3 to grant license to construct residential
building on the site in question. However respondent No.3
issued an endorsement dated 20.08.2019 rejecting the
application submitted by the petitioner stating that a suit
in O.S.No.161/2011 is pending consideration and till
disposal of the said suit, application submitted by the
petitioner cannot be considered. Hence, this writ petition.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the
decree in O.S.No.131/2011 passed against the
respondents 1 to 3 has attained finality and respondents 1
to 3 are under obligation to implement the decree passed
in O.S.No.131/2015. Hence, he submits the impugned
endorsement is not sustainable in law.
3. Learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 would
submit that suit in O.S.No.161/2011 is pending in respect
of Sy.No.21 and petitioner's application has been rightly
rejected by respondent No.3.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4
submits that the suit in O.S.No.161/2011 in respect of the
very same site in question is pending consideration and as
such till disposal of the said suit, the application submitted
by the petitioner is rightly rejected.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing for the parties.
6. Admittedly, the petitioner has obtained a decree
from the jurisdiction civil court declaring that she is the
absolute owner in possession over the site in question and
a direction is issued to respondent No.3 to grant license in
favour of the petitioner to put up construction on the site
in question. Said decree has attained finality. The
petitioner is not party to the suit in O.S.No.161/2011. In
the absence of an order of restraint by jurisdictional civil
court, impugned order is not sustainable. Accordingly, I
pass the following:
ORDER
Writ petition is allowed. Impugned order dated
20.08.2019 passed by respondent No.3 at Annexure-F is
hereby quashed and respondent No.3 is directed to
implement the Judgment and decree passed in
O.S.No.131/2015 within four weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of this order by granting license to the
petitioner to construct the residential building on the site
in question.
The construction to be put up by the petitioner would
be subject to the outcome of any decree to be passed by
the jurisdictional civil court.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SBN
