- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010777512025 NC: 2026:KHC:51509 RP No. 538 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN REVIEW PETITION NO. 538 OF 2025 BETWEEN: THE COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, SANKEY ROAD, BENGALURU-560020, R/BY ITS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SMT. MAMATHA KUMAR. … PETITIONER (BY SRI. SRINIVAS K.B.S. AND SRI. B. VACHAN ARUN ARADHYA, SRI. BEEMSEN METI, ADVOCATES) AND: SRI. K. RATHAN KUMAR S/O SRI. B.N. KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT: FLAT NO.2 IN THE PROPERTY BEARING NO.48, 2ND CROSS, PANDURANGA NAGAR, ARIKERE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560076. … RESPONDENT (BY SRI. R.B. SADASHIVAPPA, ADVOCATE) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER PASSED DATED 12.01.2024 PASSED BY THIS COURT IN W.P. NO.12397/2023 (BDA) AND ETC., SAROJA HANGARAKI Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010777512025 NC: 2026:KHC:51509 RP No. 538 of 2025 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER 1. Aggrieved by the order passed in WP No.12397/2023, the present review petition is filed by the respondent therein. 2. The petitioner herein, which is Bangalore Development Authority (for short, ‘the BDA’), was ordered to execute a deed of reconveyance in favour of the respondent herein in respect of Site No.363, Srinivasa Nagar layout BSK 1st stage, Bengalure, because the property of the respondent herein was acquired by the BDA, and the Bangalore Development Authority in WP No.12397/2023 conceded to the said fact and also undertook to execute the necessary deed of reconveyance. 3. However, the present review petition is filed on the ground that when the concerned officials of the BDA - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010777512025 NC: 2026:KHC:51509 RP No. 538 of 2025 went to inspect the site, they found that a three-storied house was already constructed on the said property by a third party and there have been multiple litigations regarding the same over a period of time. In this regard, an affidavit dated 04.08.2026 shown by one Mamatha Kumari, Assistant Commissioner, R & R, Bengalore Development Authority, has been filed. In the said affidavit, it is also submitted that, not knowing the actual status of the property, a submission was made before this Court in the proceedings wherein the BDA agreed to execute a deed of reconveyance. It is submitted that presently they are not in a position to execute such deed of reconveyance because the property itself is not in possession of either of the parties and is in possession of third parties and that there have been several litigations regarding the same and various orders have been passed by various courts in this regard. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010777512025 NC: 2026:KHC:51509 RP No. 538 of 2025 4. On the said ground, it is prayed that the order passed in the writ petition be reviewed. 5. Admittedly, there is no dispute regarding the eligibility of the respondent for a deed of reconveyance/sale deed in respect of a site in the light of certain properties belonging to the petitioner/his mother having been acquired. For practical reasons, the petitioner BDA is not in a position to execute a deed of reconveyance in respect of the property which is the subject matter of the writ petition. 6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that the respondent has no objection if an alternative site of equal value is allotted to him. 7. It is the responsibility of the BDA to safeguard the properties that have been acquired for its purposes. For the fault of Bangalore Development Authority, the respondent cannot be made to suffer. However, taking - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010777512025 NC: 2026:KHC:51509 RP No. 538 of 2025 into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, as it is not physically possible for the BDA to allot the site which is the subject matter of the writ petition and the submission that the present site will be allotted was made by mistake, I am of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the order passed in the writ petition is modified and a direction is issued to the BDA to allot a site equivalent to the value of the site which is the subject matter of the writ petition, anywhere in Bangalore, to the respondent within a period of 45 days from today. Ordered accordingly. 8. The review petition stands disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE AC CT:BCK LIST NO.: 19 SL NO.: 7