IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.612 OF 2018 BETWEEN Sri. Shivanna H.B., S/o. Boraiah @ Motaiah, Aged about 67 years, Represented by his G.P.A.holder, Sri. Shyam Prasad H.S., S/o. Shivanna H.B., Aged about 32 years, Both are R/at Hulivana Village, Keragodu 2 Hobli, Mandya Taluk & District.
(By Sri. M.R.Rajagopal, Advocate) AND The Assistant Commissioner (Land Acquisition), Bengaluru Sub Division, Project Enforcement Wing, Karnataka State Highway, Development Authority, Crescent Towers, Cellar Floor, By the side of Mallige Nursing Home, Crescent Road, Bengaluru-560001.
(By Smt. Shwetha Krishnappa, Govt. Advocate) …Petitioner …Respondent This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of CPC, against the order dated 05.09.2018 passed on I.A. in LAC No.17/2016 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Mandya dismissing the I.A. filed under Section 152 of CPC.
This Civil Revision Petition coming on for admission, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER Heard the petitioner’s counsel and the learned Government Advocate.
2. In this revision petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.09.2018 on Interlocutory application filed under Section 152 CPC in LAC.No.17/2016 on the file of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Mandya in relation to acquisition of 1 gunta of land in Sy.No.18/4B2 at Hulivana Village, Keragodu-2 Hobli, Mandya Taluk. Acquisition notification was issued showing the name of one Boraiah @ Kotappa, son of Kadi Manchegowda as the land owner. It is stated that the correct name of the land owner is Boraiah @ Motaiah. The revenue records stood in the name of Boraiah @ Motaiah. While issuing computerized RTC the name was wrongly shown as Boraiah @ Kotappa. The reference court while disposing of LAC.17/16 directed the office to draw award after obtaining the documents to the effect that the correct name is Boraiah @ Motaiah. It appears that the petitioner produced documents which were marked in the LAC proceedings and requested the court for correcting the name. The Reference court is of the opinion that Section 152 of CPC could not be invoked as there was no typographical or arithmetical error and mentioning the name as Boraiah @ Kotappa was not due to any inadvertence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to Ex.P.3 marked in LAC proceedings. It is an endorsement dated 11.10.68 in connection with alienation of 10 guntas of land in Sy.No.18/4 of Hulivana village. In this document the name is shown as Boraiah @ Motappa. In some of the computerized RTC the name is shown as Boraiah @ Kotaiah. Therefore there is no difficulty to hold that the correct name is Boraiah @ Motaiah. The acquisition notification is issued in the name of Boraiah @ Kotappa. Since the records before the court showed the name as Boraiah @ Kotappa, the same name came to be shown in the award also. This is the reason why the Reference court has held that there is no scope for correcting the mistake under Section 152 CPC. Though reasons assigned by the Reference Court stand to reason, however nothing prevented the Reference Court from exercising its inherent power under Section 151 CPC in making the correction of the name. The respondent should not have resisted this application. Hence I find that this revision petition can be allowed and ordered accordingly. The name of the claimant shall be correct as Boraiah @ Motaiah.
SD/- JUDGE sd