IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA WRIT PETITION NOs.51363-51364/2017(KLR-RES) BETWEEN SRI K H RAMAKRISHNAPPA S/O LATE HUTCHAPPA @ CHIKKAHUCHAPPA AGED ABOUT 84 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.1663, ‘SHREE MARUTI FARM’ NEAR IMPACT COLLEGE AMCO LAYOUT KODIGEHALLI, SAHAKAR NAGAR POST BANGALORE – 560092 ... PETITIONER (BY SRI N SONNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M S BUILDING DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT K G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560009 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB- DIVISION KANDAYA BHAVANA, K.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560009 4. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR BANGALORE NORTH TALUK (ADDL.) YELAHANKA SATELLITE TOWN BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT - 560064 5. SRI P P.NAGARAJU S/O PERUMALAPPA MAJOR NO.269, C.Q.A.L LAYOUT SAHAKARANAGARA BENGALURU – 560 092 6. SMT JAYAMMA W/O LATE N RAMACHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS RESIDENT OF KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE NEAR SRI VINAYAKA SHCOOL YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560092 7. SRI G NARAYANA S/O LATE GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 8. SRI K G VENKATESH S/O LATE GANGAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESPONDENTS NO.7 AND 8 ARE RESIDENTS OF KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU – 560 092 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VENKATESH DODDERI, AGA FOR R1 TO R4, SRI BALARAJ.M.V, ADVOCATE FOR C/R5 VIDE ORDER DATED 10.04.2019, NOTICE TO R6 IS HELD SUFFICIENT MS.MONICA PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R7 & R8) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.12.07.2017, PASSED IN RP 227/2014-15 AND IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 12.07.2017 PASSED IN RP NO. 444/2015-16 BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU, THE 2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN TO AN EXTENT OF 0-7½ GUNTAS IN SY.NO.206/2 OF KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE, YELAHANKA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK (ANNEXURES -X & Y).
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The connected writ petition in WP.No.616/2018 is already disposed off by order dated 13.2.2019. While disposing of the said writ petition it was brought to the notice of this Court that very same land and very same orders which are subject matter of challenge in said writ petition are also involved in present WP.Nos.51363-64/2017. Hence, the present writ petitions are taken up for consideration.
2. Admittedly, in the aforesaid two proceedings, everything revolves around the flow of title to land bearing Sy.No.206/2 of Kodigehalli village, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, measuring to an extent of 1 acre 19 guntas. The said land was the property of one Bachappa, who had 2 sons by name Munivenkatappa and Mudlappa. It is not in dispute that one Venkatappa is the only son of Munivenkatappa and Nanjappa is the only son of Mudlappa.
3. The records would indicate that way back on 5.5.1955 Bachappa’s grand son Venkatappa through his first son Munivenkatappa has sold 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.206/2 in favour of one Venkatamma and the said Sale Deed is not only by Venkatappa but also by his 4 sons. The execution of said Sale Deed is not in dispute. It is seen that for a long time there was no transaction in respect of land in question. However, in the year 1995 there was one more transaction which is with reference to remaining extent of 29 guntas of land in Sy.No.206/2 which is executed by the four sons of Nanjappa, who is grand son of Bachappa through his second son Mudlappa in favour of one K.G.Venkatesh and Sri.G.Narayana under a registered Sale Deed dated 27.3.1995. The said sale in favour of Venkatesh and Narayana is not in dispute inasmuch as said 29 guntas is already mutated in their favour vide MR.No.4/2003-04. Said Venkatesh and Narayana are respondent Nos.7 and 8 in this proceedings and they are only formal parties to these proceedings.
4. However, the dispute in these proceedings is only with reference to 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.206/2 which was initially sold by Bachappa’s grand son Venkatappa through his first son Munivenkatappa, where after execution of the Sale Deed, the same was not mutated in the name of purchaser – Venkatamma. It is stated that, taking advantage of the same, one Ramachandrappa s/o late Nanjappa, who is the grand son of Bachappa through his second son (who is the vendor of 29 guntas to Venkatesh and Narayana through Sale Deed of the year 1995) would create a General Power of Attorney in respect of a site measuring 60 feet x 120 feet, which is formed in 30 guntas of land which was already sold in favour of Venkatamma, where revenue entries were not transferred to her name. The said General Power of Attorney dated 13.2.1997 was executed by Ramachandrappa s/o Nanjappa in favour of one Ravi is the root cause for all the problems in these proceedings.
5. Admittedly, as on the date of execution of General Power of Attorney, Nanjappa’s son Ramachandrappa did not have title to any portion of land bearing Sy.No.206/2, inasmuch as, entire extent of 1 acre 19 guntas was already sold on two different dates as stated supra, i.e., 30 guntas in favour of Venkatamma on 5.5.1955 and 29 guntas in favour of Venkatesh and Narayana under Sale Deed dated 27.3.1995, therefore, the General Power of Attorney which was executed in favour of Ravi on 13.2.1997 is with reference to site measuring 60 feet x 120 feet formed in non existing land.
6. It is stated that, subsequently said Ravi - the General Power of Attorney Holder sold the site measuring 60 feet x 120 feet in favour of his wife Usha Rani under Sale Deed dated 16.8.1999. Thereafter, the records would disclose that, both Ravi and Usha Rani together executed a Sale Deed in favour of one P.Nagaraju on 14.9.2007, where the vendor Usha Rani would convey 7½ guntas of land to said Nagaraju, who is 5th respondent in these proceedings when admittedly the title she had secured is only to an extent of 60 feet x 120, which works out to 7200 square feet, she would convey 7½ guntas of land in favour of P.Nagaraju which works out to 8494.02 square feet, which is 1294 square feet over and above of the land, that was conveyed in her favour. In any event, as observed by this Court supra, Ramachandrappa who executed General Power of Attorney in favour of Ravi had no title either to land measuring 60 feet x 120 feet or to 7½ guntas as stated in the Sale Deed executed by said Ravi as a General Power of Holder of Ramachandrappa and as well as Usha Rani in favour of P.Nagaraju on 14.9.2007.
7. Subsequently, it is seen that a Rectification Deed was executed by Ramachandrappa through his GPA Holder - Ravi along with Usha Rani in favour of P.Nagaraju on 20.5.2016. However, the records would indicate that by then Ramachandrappa had died. Therefore, the Rectification Deed which was executed on 20.5.2016 is by a person who had died much earlier to 20.5.2016 (i.e., the executor Ramachandrappa had died on 28.8.2007 itself). Therefore, the said Rectification Deed would even otherwise would not enure to the benefit of anybody. However, it is on the basis of said Rectification Deed, 5th respondent – P.Nagaraju is staking claim for registration of katha in his favour in respect of 7½ guntas of land in Sy.No.206/2.
8. In this background, the records would indicate that there are several rounds of proceedings before the revenue authorities resting with proceedings bearing No.RP.227/2014-15 on the file of Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District, where the right of P.Nagaraju, 5th respondent herein is recognized to an extent of 7½ guntas in land bearing Sy.No.206/2 and accordingly, the same was ordered to be registered in his name. In the meanwhile, there is an attempt on the part of the legal heirs of Venkatamma to get 30 guntas of land purchased by her mutated in their name. However, the authorities concerned would accept it only to an extent of 21½ guntas initially in proceedings bearing No.MR.No.5/2017-18 and 7½ in favour of P.Nagaraju in the said proceedings, which is incorrect. In fact, in the connected writ petition in WP.No.616/2018, this Court has discussed elaborately all the proceedings with reference to aforesaid land. Therefore, it is held that entire 30 guntas in Sy.No.206/2 should be registered in the name of legal heirs of Venkatamma in the revenue record.
9. Accordingly, this writ petition is also allowed in holding that the order dated 12.7.2017 passed in proceedings bearing No.RP.227/2014-15 and the order dated 12.7.2017 in proceedings No.RP.No.444/2015-16 on the file of Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District in recognizing the right of 5th respondent to an extent of 7½ is erroneous, consequently the said orders are hereby quashed as it is done in WP.No.616/2018 and the entire extent of 30 guntas is hereby directed to be registered in the name of petitioner, who is legal heir of Venkatamma, who has purchased 30 guntas of land in Sy.No.206/2 vide Sale Deed dated 5.5.1955. At the same time with reference to 29 guntas of land being registered in the name of Venkatesh and Narayana pursuant to Sale Deed dated 27.3.1995, it is accepted in their name.
10. With such observations, these writ petitions are disposed of following the finding recorded in WP.No.616/2018, disposed off on 13.2.2019.
Sd/- JUDGE nd/-