IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA REVIEW PETITION NO.457 OF 2017 IN WRIT APPEAL NOS.3555-3556 OF 2015 (BDA) BETWEEN:
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SANKEY ROAD, BENGALURU, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
(BY SRI SACHIN B. S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. KRISHI GANGOTHRI LAYOUT OWN HOUSE/SITE OWNERS, WELFARE ASSOCIATION UAS-GKVK LAYOUT, JAKKUR, BENGALURU-64, ... PETITIONER REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, B. PARAMESH.
2. SHOBHA SUBURBIA APARTMENT OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, JAKKUR, BENGALURU-64, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P. WILLIAM.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEPARTMENT, MULTI STORED BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001.
4. SMT. SHARADHAMMA WIFE OF LATE JAYARAME GOWDA, RESIDING AT JAKKUR VILLAGE, YALAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 064.
5. MR. RAVIKUMAR SON OF LATE JAYARAME GOWDA, RESIDING AT JAKKUR VILLAGE, YALAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 064.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ARAVIND KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-2 GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R-3;
SRI ZULFIKIR KUMAR SHAFI, ADVOCATE R-4 AND R-5) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 05.04.2016 PASSED IN W.A.NOS.3555 TO 3556 OF 2015 (BDA), ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU.
***** THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH, J., PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER There is a delay of 496 days in filing this review petition. It is stated that after the disposal of the writ appeal, the respondents have moved for implementation of the order under review. In the interregnum, the Director Government Air Force School has sent a communication to the Bengaluru Development Authority that, the land which is intended to be acquired is for extension of the ‘runway’, which is a subsequent event. Consequently, a decision was taken to file this petition. Therefore, there is a delay of 496 days in filing the review petition.
2. Statement of objections have been filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
3. On considering the same, we are of the view that sufficient cause has been shown to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing the review petition is condoned. The application in I.A.No.1 of 2017 is allowed.
4. Insofar as the merits of the case is concerned, by the order under review it was noted that, the Bengaluru Development Authority has also agreed to acquire the land for the purpose of forming a road, as a consequence of a meeting before the Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development Department, Government of Karnataka. It is presently brought to our notice that, subsequent to the said order a request has been made that the land cannot be acquired. Therefore, we are of the view that the judgment requires to be recalled and the matter requires to be reconsidered on merits.
5. In view of the error apparent on record, the judgment dated 05.04.2016, passed in Writ Appeal Nos.3555 to 3556 of 2015, is recalled. The appeal is restored to file. Post the appeal for consideration.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE JJ