- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 1325 OF 2016 (LB-BMP) C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 35004 OF 2016 (LB-BMP) IN WP No. 1325/2016 BETWEEN: SMT. LATHA K C., D/O LATE PUSHPAMMA, MAJOR, AGED 45 YEARS, RESIDENT NO.28, F STREET, JAYARAJANAGAR, BANGALORE-38. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. B.S. GAUTHAM., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER, BBMP, NR SQUARE, BANGALORE-560 002. 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (EAST) BBMP, MAYOHALL BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER (BBMP) JEEVANBHIMANAGAR SUB DIVISION, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-38. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (BBMP) JEEVANBHIMANAGAR SUB DIVISION, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, INDIRANAGARA 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-38. 5. SRI.N KANNAIAH S/O LATE SWAMYNATHAN Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/A NO.7, JAYARAJANAYAGAR, F STREET, HALASURU, BANGALORE-560 008. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.L. SANJEEV, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO 4; SRI S.G. MUNISWAMY GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO-QUASH THE NOTICES DTD 22.12.2015 ISSUED BY THE R-4 VIDE ANNEXRE-E. DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 TO EXECUTE THE SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AFTER COLLECTING MARKET VALUE NECESSARY STAMP DUTY AND VALUE IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY IN POSSESSION OF THE PETITIONER. DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DTD 15.12.2014 VIDE ANNEXURE-G. DIRECT THE R-1 TO 4 FROM TAKING ANY ACTION AGAINST THE PETITIONER TILL THE CONSIDERATION OF REPRESENTATION. IN WP NO. 35004/2016 BETWEEN: SRI KANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, S/O LATE SWAMYNATHAN R/AT NO.7, JAYARAJNAGARA F STREET, HALASURU BANGALORE-560 008. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.G.R. ANIL GHOSH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BBMP NR SQUARE BANGALORE-560 002. 2. THE JOINT COMMISIONER (EAST) BBMP, MAYO HALL, RESIDENCY ROAD BANGALORE-560 001. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 3. THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER JEEVANBHIMANAGAR SUB DIVISION, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-560 038. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER JEEVANBHIMANAGAR SUB DIVISION, 4TH MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE, BANGALORE-560 038 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.V.MURALIDHAR, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTCLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO PUT THE PETITIONER IN VACANT POSSESSION OF THE SCHEDULE PROPETY AS PER THEIR RESOLUTION DATED 10.11.2005 VIDE ANNEXRE-C AND THE SALE DEED REGISTERED ON 28.10.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE-D IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON I.A., THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER In W.P. NO.1325/2016, the petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of Eviction Notice dated 22.12.2015 [Annexure-E], by which the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike [BBMP] has called upon her to produce documents to establish her right over the property in question. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the order passed by this court in W.P. No. 4110/1992 on - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 17.12.1997, the government has considered the case of the petitioner's mother and passed an order in the following terms: "ಕಾಟಕ ಸಾರದ ನಡವಗಳ «µÀAiÀÄ: ೕಮ. ¥ÀĵÀàªÀÄä ºÁUÀÆ ೕ.ಎ.ಾಾಥ ಇವೆ ಜಯ#ಾಜನಗರದ ಎ$ %ೕ&ಯ ಅರ ಮರದ ಪಕ)ದ*+ ,-ೇಶಾ ಮಂಜೂರು 2ಾಡುವ ಬೆ4. ಒದ7ಾ89ೆ: 1. :ೆಂಗಳ;ರು ಮ<ಾನಗರ =ಾ*ೆಯ ಆಯುಕ?ರು ಪತ ¸ÀA. J3(2), ¦Dgï:41:01-02, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 27-09-2001, ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 15-02-2002. ಪಾ?ವೆ: :ೆಂಗಳ;ರು ಮ<ಾನಗರ =ಾ*ೆಯ ಆಯುಕ?ರು Aೕ7ೆ ಓದ7ಾದ ಪತಗಳ*+ :ೆಂಗಳ;ರು ಮ<ಾನಗರ =ಾ*ೆ -ಾC ನಂ.82, ಜಯ#ಾಜನಗರ, ಎ$ %ೕ&ಯ*+ರುವ =ಾ*ೆಯ Dಾಗದ*+ 41+41/2+56 ಅEಗಳ DಾಗವನುF ಗು?ೆ ,ೕಡಲು ,ಣIJದುK, ಸದ ,-ೇಶನದ ಒಂದು Lಾಗದ*+ ಅನMಕೃತ-ಾ8 -ಾಸ 2ಾಡು?ದK ೕ.ಎ.ಾಾಥ ರವರು ಉಚQಾRSಾಲಯದ T#ೆ <ೋ8ದುK, ಸದ ಾRSಾಲಯದ*+ ಯUಾJVಯನುF ಾ=ಾEೊಂಡು ಬರುವಂWೆ ಆ9ೇಶ ,ೕEದುK, ಸದ X ಅY Z7ೇ-ಾSಾ8ದುK, ಸದ Dಾಗದ ಒಂದು Lಾಗದ*+ ಅನMಕೃತ-ಾ8 -ಾಸ 2ಾಡು?ರುವ ಇವೆ =ಾ*ೆಯ ,ಣಯ <ಾಗೂ ಸಾರದ ಆ9ೇಶದ*+ ಅನುTೕ&JರುವಂWೆ ಪSಾಯ ,-ೇಶನದ ಹಂ\ೆ 2ಾಡುವವ#ೆೆ ಇವರನುF Wೆರವ] 2ಾEಸ:ಾರ9ೆಂದು ಾRSಾಲಯ ,9ೇಶನ ,ೕEರುತ?9ೆ ಎಂದು J9ಾK#ೆ. ೕಮ.ಪ]ಷ_ಮ` ಇವರು ಜಯ#ಾಜನಗರದ ಎ$ %ೕ&ಯ*+ರುವ ಅರ ಮರದ ಪಕ)ದ*+ನ 28.9+25 ಅE ಅಳWೆಯ Dಾಗದ*+ ಅನMಕೃತ-ಾ8 -ಾಸ-ಾ8ದುK, ಇವರನುF Wೆರವ] 2ಾEಸುವ Zರುದa ಉಚQ-ಾRSಾಲಯದ*+ - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 X ಅY ಸ*+JದುK, ಉಚQ ಾRSಾಲಯವ] ತನF ೕbನ*+ ಅY9ಾರರು ಈ dಂ9ೆ ,-ೇಶನದ ಹಂ\ೆ 2ಾಡುವಂWೆ ೋರುವ]ದಂದ ಇವೆ ಹಂ\ೆ 2ಾಡಲು ಾನೂನು ೕಯ ಕಮ ೈೊಳfಬಹು9ೆಂದು ಆ9ೇJರುವ dನF7ೆಯ*+ ಪೕ*J =ಾ*ೆಯ ಜಯ#ಾಜನಗರದ ಎ$ %ೕ&ಯ ಆರ ಮರದ ಪಕ)ದ*+ 17-8.9 ಅE DಾಗವನುF ೕಮ. ಪ]ಷ_ಮ`ರವೆ <ಾಗೂ 15+22 ಅE DಾಗವನುF ೕ.ಎ.ಾಾಥ ರವೆ ಚದರ ಗಜ ಒಂದೆ) ರೂ.100-00 ಾಮ 2ಾತ :ೆ7ೆಯ ಗು?ೆ ಕಯದ ಆgಾರದ Aೕ7ೆ ,ೕಡಲು <ಾಗೂ & ಚh ಆ$ 7ಾC Yೕಸi jಸ? ರವೆ =ಾಥಾ ಮಂ&ರದ ,2ಾಣಾ)8 -ಾC ಸಂ.82, ಎ$ %ೕ&ಯ*+ರುವ =ಾ*ೆಯ Dಾಗದ*+ kೌmಾಲಯ ಮತು? ೊಳ-ೆ :ಾZIಂದ 1 ಅE ಒಟುn 41+41.8/56 ಅE DಾಗವನುF 99 ವಷಗಳ ಅವMೆ ಗು?ೆೆ ,ೕಡಲು &ಾಂಕ: 21-03-2001 ರಂದು ನoೆದ =ಾ*ೆ Zಷಯ ಸಂ.19(341) ರ*+ ೕ2ಾನ-ಾ8ರುತ?9ೆ. :ೆಂಗಳ;ರು ಮ<ಾನಗರ =ಾ*ೆಯ ಆಯುಕ?ರು ಸದ ಪ9ೇಶದ 2ಾರುಕpೆn :ೆ7ೆಯು -ಾಸಾ)8 ಚದರ ಅE 1PÉÌ 410-00 ರೂ.ಇದುK :ೆಂಗಳ;ರು ಮ<ಾನಗರ =ಾ*ೆ ,ಣದ*+ 2ಾರುಕpೆn :ೆ7ೆಯನುF ಗಣೆೆ WೆೆದುೊಂEರುವ]&ಲ+-ೆಂದು ಳಸುWಾ? =ಾ*ೆಯ ಆ&ಕ dತದೃqnIಂದ ೕಮ ಪ]ಷ_ಮ` ಮತು? ೕ.ಎ.ಾಾಥ ರವೆ ಸದ DಾಗವನುF ಪಸಕ? 2ಾರುಕpೆn ದರದ*+ ಕಯೆ) ,ೕಡುವ]ದು ಸೂಕ?-ಾ8ರುತ?9ೆಂದು ಅr=ಾಯಪsn9ಾK#ೆ. ಅದುದಂದ ಈ ಆ9ೇಶ. ಸಾ ಆ9ೇಶ ಸಂ.ನಅಇ 304 ಎಂಎ Y 2001, :ೆಂಗಳ;ರು, &ಾಂಕ: 08-01-2002. ಪಾ?ವೆಯ*+ನ ಅಂಶಗಳನುF ಕೂಲಂಕುಷ-ಾ8 ಪೕ*Jದ ನಂತರ, ಸದ Zmಾರದ*+ ಉಚQ ಾRSಾಲಯವ] ,ೕEರುವ ೕಪ]ಗಳನುF ಪ=ಾ*ಸಲು &ಾಂಕ: 21-03-2001 ರಂದು ನoೆದ =ಾ*ೆಯ ಸLೆಯ*+ Wೆೆದುೊಂಡ ೕ2ಾನದ Aೕ#ೆೆ -ಾC ಸಂ.82, ಜಯ#ಾಜನಗರದ ಎ$ %ೕ&ಯ ಅರ ಮರದ ಪಕ)ದ 17-8.9 ಅE DಾಗವನುF ೕಮ, ಪ]ಷ_ಮ` ರವೆ <ಾಗೂ 15+22 ಅE DಾಗವನುF ೕ.ಎ.ಾಾಥ ರವೆ - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 ಪಸು?ತ ಾ*ನ 2ಾರುಕpೆn ದರೆ) kೇ.20 ರಷುn ದರ <ೆh %J ಮಂಜೂರು 2ಾಡಲು ಸಾರವ] ಅನುಮ ,ೕE9ೆ. ಕಾಟಕ #ಾಜR=ಾಲರ ಅtಾನುಾರ ಮತು? ಅವರ <ೆಸನ*+, ಸd/- ಸಾರದ ಅMೕನ ಾಯದ, ನಗ#ಾrವೃ&a ಇ7ಾuೆ." 3. It is therefore the contention of the petitioner that once the Government had directed conveyance of the property to the petitioner at the market value prevailing as on 08.10.2002, the question of BBMP calling upon the petitioner to produce documents would be a meaningless exercise. It is also sought to be contended that though the Government Order was in relation to the petitioner's mother and A. Swaminathan and though the BBMP had conveyed the property to A. Swaminathan, the same benefit was not extended to the petitioner despite the order of the Government. 4. The learned counsel for the BBMP however has contended that the petitioner and her mother had encroached upon the property of A. Swaminathan and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 therefore the question of conveying the property to the petitioner or her mother would not arise. 5. During the pendency of this petition, this court had directed an inspection to be carried out of the property in question and a report was secured which was to the effect that the petitioner was in possession of the land in excess of the portion allotted to her. The petitioner acknowledges the fact that she was in possession of land in excess of the land allotted to her mother and had also filed an affidavit that she would be handing over possession of this excess land in her possession. The petitioner was granted time to demolish structures put up on the encroached portion and today, a submission is made that the encroached portion has been demolished. 6. In the light of the fact that the petitioner had restricted her claim to the extent of the land allotted to her mother and the Government had also passed an order way back in the year 2002 directing the BBMP to convey property measuring an extent of 17 x 8.9 ft., it would be - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 appropriate to direct the BBMP to convey the said extent of 17 x 8.9 ft. in favour of the petitioner within a period of two months from today. 7. A dispute however has arisen regarding the market value that would have to be paid by the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the market value suggested in the Government Order was only Rs.410/- and therefore it would be appropriate to apply the said market value. This contention is however strongly refuted by the learned counsel for the BBMP and he contends that the present market value would have to be paid since the property is being conveyed now. 8. It is not in dispute that in respect of adjoining property, which is also the subject matter of the Government Order dated 08.01.2002, a sale deed was executed by the BBMP in favour of A. Swaminathan's son and the BBMP had collected a sum of Rs.1,600/- plus 20% extra as sale consideration. In my view, the same amount - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 of Rs.1600/- plus 20% extra would have to be collected from the petitioner before execution of the sale deed. 9. It is however noticed that the BBMP was entitled to this amount in the year 2015 itself. Therefore, apart from above mentioned sale consideration, the petitioner is also liable to pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the sale consideration from the year 2015 and on the petitioner remitting the said amount within a period of one month, the BBMP shall convey the property as per the Government Order in favour of the petitioner within a period of two months thereafter. The writ petition stands disposed of. 10. Writ Petition No.35004/2016 is filed by A. Swaminathan's son, who was also the beneficiary of the Government Order, seeking a direction to the respondent to put him in possession of the schedule property as per the sale deed registered on 28.10.2015. It is the case of the BBMP that they could not put the petitioner in possession by virtue of the encroachment by the petitioner - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:7631 WP No. 1325 of 2016 C/W WP No. 35004 of 2016 in W.P. No.1325/2016. However, since the petitioner in W.P.No.1325/2016 has demolished the structure that she had erected on the encroached portion, the BBMP shall handover possession of the encroached portion to the petitioner in W.P. No.35004/2016 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. W.P. No.35004/2016 stands disposed of. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE NV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37