IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No.5635/2019(LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
SMT. FAZILA KHANUM AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS W/O LATE. ABDUL KAREEM JEELANI R/NO.1, 3RD CROSS MARAPPA GARDEN, J C NAGAR BANGALORE-560 006.
... PETITIONER (BY SRI. NAVEED AHMED, ADV.) AND 1. THE COMMISSIONER BBMP, N R SQUARE BANGALORE-560 052.
2. ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER GANGANAGAR SUB DIVISION BANGALORE-560 032 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.M C NAGASHREE, ADV. FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 26.09.2018 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENT-2 TO MUTATE KHATA IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITONER AT THE EARLIEST VIDE APPLICATION NO.BB1990000419659.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING “B” GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
“a. Issue writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned endorsement dated:26.09.2018 vide Annexure-A.
b. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to mutate khata in favour of the petitioner at the earliest vide application No.BB1990000419659.
c. Pass such other order or further order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit under the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s husband is the owner and in possession and enjoyment of the property bearing No.13, situated at Dinnur Main Road, Kausar nagar, Matadahalli, Bangalore-32. He acquired the property by way of gift deed from his mother i.e., Smt.Niyamatunnissa dated 30.4.1992. After the death of the petitioner’s husband, the petitioner applied for change of katha in her name. The respondent No.1 issued an endorsement dated 26.9.2018 vide Annexure-A rejecting the application of the petitioner on the ground that the death certificate of the petitioner’s husband has not been submitted along with the application.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has produced the death certificate of the petitioner’s husband along with this writ petition vide Annexure-E.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner’s application is not rejected vide Annexure-A. The respondent has requested the petitioner to furnish the additional documents, since the petitioner has not produced the death certificate of her husband. Hence, if reasonable time is granted, the application of the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law .
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. The respondents are directed to consider the application of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and shall communicate the same to the petitioner.
Sd/- JUDGE DM