IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION No.115/2018 (LB-BMP) Between:
Sri Kuppuswamy, S/o Late Pullappa, Aged about 68 years, Self employee, R/at Behind the Sri Rama Temple, Doopanahalli, HAL 2nd Stage, Bangalore – 560 008.
Since dead represented by LRs 1(a) Smt. Ganga, W/o Late Kuppuswamy, Aged about 50 years.
1(b) Sri Prasad, S/o Late Kuppuswamy, Aged about 30 years.
1(c) Usha Rani, D/o Late Kuppuswamy, Aged about 26 years.
All are R/at No.26, Mariyamma Koil Street, Bangalore – 560 047. … Petitioners (By Sri Manjunath S.V., Advocate) And:
1. The Commissioner, Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Head office at Hudson Circle, Bangalore – 560 009.
2. The Joint Commissioner (East), Bruhath Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Mayo Hall, Bangalore – 560 027.
3. Assistant Revenue Officer, Domlur Sub-Division, Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike, Bangalore – 560 071.
4. Sri N. Rajanna, S/o Sri Baddi Narayanappa, Aged about 45 years, R/at No.88/2, Vasanthappan Garden, Indiranagara, Bangalore – 560 008. … Respondents (By Sri Shivananda Meti, Advocate for R1 to R3; Sri A.S. Mahesh, Advocate for R4) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 2.11.2017 passed in case bearing No.Joint.Com(E)/PR/114A/06-16-17 by the Joint Commissioner (East), Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, Mayohall, Bangalore at Annexure-E in so far as this petitioner is concerned and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The petitioners have challenged the order at Annexure-E dated 02.11.2017 and contends that power has been exercised beyond a period of three years which is the outer limit for exercise of power under Section 114A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act,1976 (‘the Act’ for brevity) 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed a memo and produced the Khatha Certificate evidencing the entry standing in the name of petitioner (late Kuppaswamy) as on 09.07.2001.
3. Taking note of the said fact, the impugned order at Annexure-E dated 02.11.2017 is liable to be set aside only on the ground that power cannot be exercised beyond the period stipulated under Section 114A of the Act.
4. All contentions of parties are kept open.
Liberty is reserved to the respondent – Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike to take action as permissible under law as regards the entry made in the name of the petitioner.
5. The contentions of respondent No.4 are kept open and so also the other course of action that may be initiated as against the Khatha entry of petitioner at the instance of respondent No.4.
Accordingly, petition is disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE VGR