Karnataka High Court
Sri P Venkatesh vs Deputy Commissioner on 27 November, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:42676
WP NO.10661 OF 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
WRIT PETITION NO.10661 OF 2021 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. P. VENKATESH
S/O LATE PAPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT NO.943/G, 7TH CROSS,
BEHIND SHANIMAHATMA TEMPLE,
D-BLOCK, VIJAYANANDA NAGAR,
NANDINI LAYOUT,
BENGALURU - 560 096.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A.G. BALLOLLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT
BANGALURU.
Digitally signed by
ARUN KUMAR M S 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Location: High BANGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION,
Court of Karnataka
BENGALURU.
3. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR
YESHWANTHPUR,
BENGALURU - 21.
4. V. KRISHNAMMA @ KRISHNAVENI
DEAD BY ITS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES.
4(a). SRI. ARUN KUMAR
S/O LATE V KRISHNAMMA @ KRISHNAVENI
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:42676
WP NO.10661 OF 2021
R/AT NO.86, 14TH 'D' CROSS,
2ND STAGE, 2ND PHASE,
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM,
BENGALURU - 560 086.
4(b). SRI. PRASANNA KUMAR
S/O LATE V. KRISHNAMMA @ KRISHNAVENI
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/AT NO.485, 1ST 'F' CROSS,
3RD STAGE, 4TH BLOCK, 8TH MAIN,
BASAVESHWARNAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 079.
5. SRI. CHINNAPPA
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS.
6. SMT. CHINNAMMA
D/O LATE VENKATAPPA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 ARE
R/AT KARIVOBANAHALLI VILLAGE,
YESHWANTPURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK
REP. BY HER GPA HOLDER.,
RESPONDENT NO.4.
7. VENKATASWAMY
SINCE DEAD BY LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES.
8. SMT. YELLAMMA
D/O VENKATAPPA @ VENKATABOVI
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
9. SMT. SHANTHAMMA
D/O VENKATAPPA @ VENKATABOVI
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.
10. SRI SHAMANNA
S/O VENKATAPPA @ VENKATABOVI
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:42676
WP NO.10661 OF 2021
RESPONDENTS 7 TO 10 ARE
R/AT KARIVOBANAHALLI VILLAGE,
YESHWANTPURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU NORTH TALUK.
RESPONDENTS 7 TO 10 ARE
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
V. NARAYANASWAMY (RESPONDENT NO.11).
11. SRI. NARAYANASWAMY
S/O VENKATAPPA @ VENKATABOVI
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
R/AT NO.29, 9TH CROSS,
BHOVIPALYA MAHALAKSHMIPURA,
BENGALURU - 560 086.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HARISHA A.S., AGA FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE FOR C/R4 (a) & (b);
SRI. S.V. DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R5)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06TH MARCH, 2020 PASSED IN
REVISION PETITION NO.410/2016-17 BY THE RESPONDENT
NO.1-DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIDE ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order dated
06th March, 2020 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent No.1
in Revision Petition NO.410/2016-17, wherein, the revision
petition filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed.
NC: 2023:KHC:42676
WP NO.10661 OF 2021
2. Heard Sri. A.G. Ballolli, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner; Sri. Harisha A.S., learned Additional Government
Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3; Sri. Saravana S.,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4(a) and 4(b);
and Sri. S.V. Desai, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.5.
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
parties, it is the case of the petitioner that the grand-father of
the petitioner-Hanumatha Bhovi S/o Guruswamy Bhovi was the
owner in possession of land in question and he had purchased
the same as per registered Sale Deed dated 11th April, 1949.
Thereafter, the grand-father of the petitioner himself has sold
the land in Survey No.41 and 38 of Karivobanahalli Village,
Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk. It is also
forthcoming from the impugned order that the petitioner has
filed suit in Original Suit No.53 of 2017 against the respondent
No.4 herein, seeking relief of declaration and injunction in
respect of the schedule property. In that view of the matter, I
am of the view that, as the matter is of Civil in nature and
unless the petitioner establishes right over the schedule
NC: 2023:KHC:42676
WP NO.10661 OF 2021
property, I do not find any merit in the writ petition.
Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
4. It is made clear that, dismissal of this writ petition will
not come in the way of continuance of the suit by the
petitioner. Parties shall abide by the judgment and decree that
may be passed by the Civil Court in the above suit.
SD/-
JUDGE
ARK
