IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.23102 OF 2017 (LB-RES) BETWEEN:
Smt. Krishnamma W/o. late Govindaiah Aged about 75 years Resident of No.10-31 Kashivishwanatha Temple Street Kollegala Town – 571440 Chamarajanagar District …Petitioner (By Sri. P.Mahesha, Advocate) AND:
1. The Deputy Commissioner Chamarajanagar District Chamarajanagar – 571313 2. The Commissioner City Municipal Council Kollegala Town – 571440 Chamarajanagar District 3. The State of Karnataka By its Secretary Department of Municipal Administration M.S.Building, Bengaluru -1 4. N.Raju Major S/o. late Subbanna No.5/101, Huralikeri street Kollegala Town – 571440 Chamarajanagar District ...Respondents (By Smt. B.P.Radha, AGA, for respondent Nos.1 and 3;
Sri.Veerabhadra Swamy, H.P. Advocate for respondent No.2;
Sri M.R.Shailendra, Advocate for respondent No.4) This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to call for records and allow the above petition and to quash the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 in M.A.9/2003-04 dated 22.6.2005 vide Annexure-G and orders of the Administrator, Kollegala Municipality dated nil vide Annexure-F and etc., This writ petition coming on for Orders This day, the court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of property bearing Nos.10-31, 10-31/1, 10-
31/2, 10-31/3 situated at 10th ward Kollegal Town, Chamarajanagar District.
2. The petitioner states that the Administrator has set aside the Khatha in the name of the petitioner and which came to be challenged before the Divisional Commissioner, Mysuru and the said proceedings subsequently came to be transferred to Deputy Commissioner, Chamarajanagar. It is stated that the said proceedings came to be rejected. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the revision petition, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.
3. The petitioner states that pursuant to the order of this Court dated 04.10.2018, a spot inspection and measurement of the property of the petitioner as per his document of title had been carried out.
4. The learned counsel for the second respondent has filed the statement of objections enclosing the report as well as the sketch which were prepared pursuant to the direction of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 04.10.2018. The counsel for the second respondent has stated that by virtue of the measurement carried out in the property in question, the petitioner is found to have encroached upon the public property to an extent of 30 x 90 feet which is morefully, described in the sketch at Annexure-R2 and the same is the part of statement of objections. It is further stated in the report that as regards, the remaining portion which is shown and demarcated in the sketch in green colour, the second respondent would take action to consider effecting Khatha into the name of petitioner.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the request for effecting the Khatha in the name of petitioner could be considered in terms of the findings recorded in the report as regards, measurement as per report and sketch at Annexures-R1 and R2 which is a part of the statement of objections filed by respondent No.2.
6. In view of the said submission, the petition is disposed of by setting aside the order at Annexures – F and G in part to the extent of petitioner’s entitlement of the property as pointed out in the report and sketch enclosed as per Annexures-R1 and R2.
7. Accordingly, second respondent is directed to consider effecting Khatha into the name of the petitioner by taking note of the findings recorded in the report dated 17.01.2018 at Annexure-R1 and the measurement of petitioner’s property as per sketch enclosed at Annexures-R2 and the said consideration to be completed within a period of six weeks from today.
8. In view of disposal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2019 filed for early hearing is disposed of as the same is redundant.
Sd/- JUDGE HJ