IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. OF 49180 OF 2017 (LB-BMP) BETWEEN:
SMT. GEETHA D. W/O LATE DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.632 ACHAMMA COMPOUND 1ST MAIN ROAD, MATHIKERE BENGALURU-560 054 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI VISHWANATH SETTY V., ADVOCATE ) AND:
1.THE COMMISSIONER BBMP, HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 002 2.THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (WEST DIVISION) BBMP, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU-560 054 3.THE ASSISTANT REVENUE INSPECTOR MATHIKERE SUB-DIVISION, BBMP BENGALURU-560 054 4.SMT. TAPASYA D/O NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT C/O LATE DEVARAJU S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA No.62/1, 1ST ‘E’ CROSS SAI KRISHNA NILAYA MATHIKERE BENGALURU -560 054 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI AMIT DESHPANDE, ADV.FOR R-1 TO R-3 SRI VIRUPAKSHA T. ADVOCATE FOR R-4 ) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF RESPONDENT NO.2 IN RP NO.21/2016-17; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 20.06.2017 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IN RP NO.21/2016-17 VIDE ANNEX-E AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. In this writ petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:
“a) Issue of writ of certiorari quashing the order dt. 20.06.2017 passed by the respondent No.2 in Review Petition No.21/2016-17 vide Annexure-E by allowing the above writ petition, in the interest of justice.
b) To grant such other relief/s as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that khatha in respect of property bearing Nos. PID No.4-29-62/1, PID No.4-2-59, PID No.4-2-43/1, PID No.4-33-2 stands in the name of late Devraj and Achamma. Subsequently, on request of the petitioner khatha was changed in the name of Geetha D. who is the petitioner in this writ petition. Being aggrieved by the same, respondent No.4 has filed revision petition before the Competent Authority vide Annexure-E and the revision petition has been allowed. Being aggrieved by the same the petitioner is before this Court in this petition. He further contended that the revision petition was allowed only on the ground that there is civil dispute between the parties in O.S. No.1079/2016 and today filed a memo along with the decree passed in O.S. No.1079/2016.
4. In view of the above, the writ petition does not survive for consideration. The only relief that can be granted is that both the petitioner and respondents can file representations along with that decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.1079/2016 and other relevant records before the Competent Authority. The Competent Authority is directed to consider the representation along with the documents submitted by the petitioner as well as the respondents and pass an order in accordance with law.
With this observation, writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE HR