IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.43897/2016 (LB-BMP) Between:
Rukmini Vedantachar, W/o Balaji S. Holur, D/o S.V. Vedantachar, Aged about 49 years, R/at #144, 9th Cross, 3rd Main, R.M.V. 2nd Stage, Bengaluru – 560094. ... Petitioner (By Sri L. Govindaraju., Advocate.) And:
1. Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (B.B.M.P), Hudson Circle, Bengaluru – 560002.
Represented by its Commissioner.
2. The Assistant Revenue Officer, Office of the Assistant Revenue (Rajajinagara), B.B.M.P., Commercial Complex, 2nd Block, Rajajinagara, Bengaluru – 560010. ... Respondents (By Sri M.N. Ramanjaneya Gowda, Advocate for R1 & R2) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the endorsement dated 14.07.2016 at Annexure-F issued by R-2, etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for ‘Orders’ this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioner, who is the daughter of Sri. S.V. Vedantachar, has filed the present writ petition seeking for issuance of an appropriate writ to quash the endorsement at Annexure-F.
2. The petitioner states that her father was the owner of the property and had executed a Will on 04.03.2001 and under the said Will, life estate was granted to the mother of the petitioner with reversionary rights flowing to the petitioner after the death of her mother. It is stated that the petitioner’s father died on 23.12.2015, subsequent to which the petitioner had sought for transfer of khatha into the petitioner’s name in terms of the Will.
3. Petitioner states that the respondent – BBMP has issued an endorsement at Annexure-F stating that the application of the petitioner for effecting khatha into the petitioner’s name on the basis of the Will cannot be considered in the light of the recital in the Will, conferring life estate on the mother of the petitioner. The endorsement further stipulated that details regarding the family was not forthcoming and that the original will was not forthcoming.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, that in terms of the endorsement they would furnish on affidavit of the family tree. It is also submitted that they would produce the original Will for inspection by the respondent – BBMP.
5. The petitioner concedes that in view of the conferment of life estate on the petitioner’s mother while effecting khatha, respondent – BBMP is at liberty to make appropriate entry regarding confering of life estate under the Will, apart from effecting khatha in the name of the petitioner on the basis of the Will.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents – BBMP states that in view of the said submissions of the petitioner, points raised in the endorsement stands answered.
7. Accordingly, the respondent – BBMP is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner for effecting khatha, in the light of the submissions made by the counsel of the petitioner. The said consideration for effecting khatha into the name of the petitioner will be completed within a period not later than eight weeks from the date of release of this order.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed subject to the above observations. In the light of disposal of the petition, no orders are called for as regards I.A.1/18 and accordingly, the same is disposed of.
MGN Sd/- JUDGE