- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO. 9629 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. TARUN. L, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, S/O LABURAM, NO.50, 1ST MAIN, HUCCHAPPA LANE, SVG NAGAR, MOODALAPALYA CIRCLE, NAGARBHAVI, BANGALORE- 560 072 2. SMT SANGEETHA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS W/O SRI. TARUN. L, NO.50, 1ST MAIN, HUCCHAPPA LANE SVG NAGAR, MOODALAPALYA CIRCLE, NAGARBHAVI, BANGALORE- 560 072. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. UMESH B N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, K.P WEST, BENGALURU- 560 020 2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, K.P WEST, BENGALURU- 560 020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VASANTHA., ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED CANCELLATION DEED DATED 18/07/2016, VIDE DOCUMENT BEARING NO. BDA-1-01318/2016-17, CD NO. BDAD220, DATED 19/07/2016, BOOK NO. I, IN THE OFFICE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT SUB REGISTRAR (BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY) BANGALORE URBAN DISTRICT, EXECUTED BY THE R2 IN RESPECT OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY VIDE AT ANNX-A, AS THE SAME IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND NULL AND VOID AB- INITIO. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA ORAL ORDER Sri. Vasantha, learned counsel is directed to take notice for the respondents. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 2. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking to quash the impugned cancellation deed dated 18.07.2016, registered on 19.07.2016 before the Additional District Sub Registrar (Bengaluru Development Authority) Bengaluru Urban District, executed by respondent No.2 in respect of the land bearing site No.913/A situated at Banashankari 6th stage, BDA Layout, 11th Block measuring 9 X 12 meter (herein after referred as 'schedule property' for brevity) in favour of the vendor of the petitioners. 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: The petitioners claim to be the absolute owners in possession and enjoyment of the schedule property. The said property was originally acquired by the BDA from the petitioners' vendor - Smt. B.R.Sunanda, bearing Khata No.226/311, for formation of Sir. M.Vishveshwaraiah Layout. In lieu of the acquisition, the BDA allotted an alternative site bearing No.913x1 situated at Banashankari - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 6th stage, 11th Block, Bengaluru measuring 9 X 12 meter and executed a Registered Sale Deed in favour of Smt. B.R.Sunanda. Possession Certificate was issued and Katha was transferred in her name. Subsequently, on 30.07.2015, the said Smt. B.R.Sunanda executed a Registered Sale Deed in favour of the petitioners. Thereafter, the petitioners got the katha transferred in their name and are in possession and enjoyment of the schedule property. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents. Perused the materials on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent-BDA has unilaterally, without notice either to the petitioners or to their vendor cancelled the Sale Deed dated 27.07.2015 executed in favour of the petitioners' vendor. He submits that such unilateral cancellation is impermissible in law. Reliance is placed on - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in R.C.PADMANABHAN Vs. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY1, wherein it has been held that a deed of Sale duly executed and registered cannot be nullified by execution of a unilateral deed of cancellation by the vendor. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute that the BDA has unilaterally executed the deed of Cancellation dated 27.07.2015, and submits that the present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision in R.C.PADMANABHAN's case (supra). 7. From the materials on record, it is clear that the BDA had allotted the schedule property to the vendor of the petitioners executed a Sale Deed on 27.07.2015 and the petitioners, subsequently purchased the schedule property and got the katha transferred in their name. Despite this, the BDA has unilaterally executed the 1 WP.No.3143/2012(BDA), D.D.23.08.2012 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 impugned deed of cancellation dated 18.07.2016 at Annexure-A cancelling the said Sale Deed dated 27.07.2015. 8. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court relying upon the earlier decisions of this Court in the cases of BINNY MILL LABOUR WELFARE HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED Vs. D.R.MRUTHYUNJAYA ARADHYA2 and SRI. K.RAJU Vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY3, has held that once a sale deed is duly executed and registered, the title in the property vests with the purchasers and cannot be divested by a unilateral deed of cancellation. Such cancellation can only be sought through a competent Civil Court under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. In R.C.PADMANABHAN's case (supra) at para Nos.5 and 6 it is held as under: "5. In BINNY MILL LABOUR WELFARE HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY 2 ILR 2008 KAR 2245 3 ILR 2011 KAR 120 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 LIMITED Vs. D.R.MRUTHYUNJAYA ARADHYA - (ILR 2008 KAR 2245), it has been held as under: " Unilaterally he cannot execute what is styled as a deed of cancellation, because on the date of execution and registration of the deed of cancellation, the said person has no right or interest in that property. Normally what can be done by a Court can be done by the parties to an instrument by mutual consent. Even otherwise if the parties to a document agree to cancel it by mutual consent for some reason and restore status quo ante, it is possible to execute such a deed. An agreement of sale, lease or mortgage or partition may be cancelled with the consent of the parties thereto. Because in the case of agreement of sale, lease, mortgage or partition, each of the parties to the said document even after the execution and registration of the said deed retains interest in the property and, therefore, it is permissible for them to execute one more document to annul or cancel the earlier deed. However, it would not apply to a case of deed of sale executed and registered. In the case of a sale deed executed and registered, the owner completely loses his right over the property and the purchaser becomes the absolute owner. It cannot be nullified by executing a deed of cancellation because by execution and registration of a sale deed, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 properties are being vested in the purchaser and the title cannot be divested by mere execution of a deed of cancellation. Therefore, even by consent or agreement between the purchaser and the vendor, the said sale deed cannot be annulled. If the purchaser wants to give back the property, it has to be by another deed of conveyance. If the deed is vitiated by fraud or other grounds mentioned in the Contract Act, there is no possibility of parties agreeing by mutual consent to cancel the deed. It is only the Court which can cancel the deed duly executed, under the circumstances mentioned in Section 31 and other provisions of the Specific Relief act, 1963. Therefore, the power to cancel a deed vests with a Court and it cannot be exercised by the vendor of a property." (emphasis supplied) 6. In SRI. K. RAJU VS. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ILR 2011 KAR 120), it has been held as under: "It is thus clear that when the sale deed executed and registered, the owner completely loses his right over the property and the purchaser becomes the absolute owner. It cannot be nullified by executing a deed of cancellation because by execution registration of a sale deed, the properties - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 are being vested in the purchaser and the title cannot be divested by mere execution of a deed of cancellation. Therefore, even by consent or agreement between the purchaser and the vendor, the said sale deed cannot be annulled. If the purchaser wants to give back the property, it has to be by another deed of conveyance. If the deed is vitiated by fraud or other grounds mentioned in the Contract Act, there is no possibility of parties agreeing by mutual consent to cancel the deed. It is only the Court which can cancel the deed duly executed, under the circumstances mentioned in Section 31 and other provisions of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Therefore, the power to cancel the deed vests with a Court and it cannot be exercised by the vendor of a property. After execution and registration of the sale deed, the BDA cannot determine the validity of the sale deed. It can neither execute a cancellation deed unilaterally. If the BDA is of the view that the sale deed executed by it is contrary to law, it has to approach the Civil Court for its cancellation as provided under Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act. Point No.(ii) is answered accordingly." 9. Following the above principles, it is well settled that a Registered Sale Deed cannot be nullified by - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 executing a unilateral deed of cancellation. The only remedy available to the vendor, if aggrieved, is to approach the competent Civil Court for cancellation of the Sale Deed in accordance with law. Hence, the respondents were not justified in executing the impugned deed of cancellation dated 18.07.2016 at Annexure-A. 10. For the following reasons, this Court pass the following: ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed. ii) The impugned cancellation deed dated 18.07.2016 registered on 19.07.2016 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed. iii) The respondents are however, at liberty to file a suit before the competent Civil Court seeking cancellation of the Sale Deed dated - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43117 WP No. 9629 of 2025 27.07.2015, if so advised, in accordance with law. Sd/- _____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9