IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH REVIEW PETITION NO.548 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4214 OF 2016 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN:
SMT. ERAMMA WIFE OF LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 92 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.17, 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK, EAST BYRASANDRA BENGALURU-560 011.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI OMKARA MURTHY G., AND SRI SANTHOSH KUMAR K. R., ADVOCATES (ABSENT)) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOUDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU-560 020.
3. THE SPECIAL ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, THE BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOUDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU-560 020.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VASANTH V. FERNANDEZ, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R-1;
SRI MURUGESH V. CHARATI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 AND R-3) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN WRIT PETITION NO.4214 OF 2016 (LA-BDA) AND REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 30.03.2017 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO.4214 OF 2016 (LA-BDA) AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED IN WRIT PETITION NO.4214 OF 2016 (LA-BDA) BY DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.01.2011 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE - C TO THE WRIT PETITION AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE AND GRANT THE RELIEFS SOUGHT THEREUNDER, ETC.
***** THIS REVIEW PETITION COMING ON FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER This Review petition is filed seeking to review the order dated 30-3-2017 passed in writ petition No. 4214 of 2016.
2. It is pleaded that based on the submission made by the counsel appearing for the Bengaluru Development Authority Sri G.S.Kannur, the writ petition was disposed off. Thereafter, it transpires that a wrong writ petition number has been furnished. It is based on an incorrect submission by Sri G.S.Kannur, that the petition was dismissed.
3. Presently, an affidavit is filed by the Advocate Sri G.S.Kannur. He has offered his apology for furnishing a wrong writ petition Number. In view of the facts involved, the affidavit is accepted. In view of the fact that based on the erroneous submission of the learned counsel Sri G.S.Kannur, the petition was dismissed, the same would constitute a ground to recall the order.
Consequently, the Review Petition is allowed.
The order dated 30-3-2017 passed in writ petition No.4214 of 2016 is reviewed and recalled. Writ petition is restored to file.
Sd/- JUDGE rsk/-