Supreme Court - Daily Orders
N. Thyagaraju Rep. By Power Of Attorney ... vs Commissioner Bruhath Bengaluru ... on 18 November, 2019
Bench: Indu Malhotra, Ajay Rastogi
ITEM NO.34 COURT NO.17 SECTION IV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 12748-
12753/2018
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 06-04-2017
in WA No. 246/2017, 06-04-2017 in WA No. 245/2017, 06-04-2017 in WA
No. 244/2017 06-04-2017 in WA No. 243/2017 06-04-2017 in WA No.
242/2017 06-04-2017 in WA No. 4707/2016 passed by the High Court Of
Karnataka At Bengaluru)
N. THYAGARAJU REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER ANJINAPPA
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE & ORS.
Respondent(s)
(IA No.42771/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
IA No. 19762/2019 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION
IA No. 42771/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 18-11-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI
For Petitioner(s) Ms.Aishwarya Bhati,Sr.Adv.
Mr.B.Vishwanath Bhandarkar,Adv.
Mr.Sarbendra Kumar,Adv.
Mr.E.Venkatarami Reddy,Adv.
Mr.M.Mohan Kumar,Adv.
Mr. Karunakar Mahalik, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr.Kashi Vishweshar,Adv.
Mr. A. Karthik, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The present Special Leave Petitions have been filed to Signature Not Verified challenge the order dated 6th April,2017 passed by the High Court of Digitally signed by SUSHMA KUMARI BAJAJ Date: 2019.11.25 12:29:07 IST Reason: Karnataka in Writ Appeal Nos. 4707/2016 and 242-246/2017.
…..2 -2- The issue which has been raised by the petitioner is that the application for transfer of the Khatha number to the name of the appellants, has arbitrarily been rejected even though there is no dispute with respect to the title to the suit property situated in Khatha No.13 comprising of approximately 9881 Sq.ft. The petitioner submits that they have been paying the property tax since the date of purchase of the said property.
The Revenue Authorities have, however, refused to allow the application for change of Khatha on account of the pendency of Suit No. 1060/2007 in the Court of II Additional Civil Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru.
We see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the High Court at this juncture, since the aforesaid Suit for Injunction pertains to a large tract of land, including the suit property.
We however, direct the Court of II Additional Civil Judge Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru to decide Suit No.1060/2007 expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from today, since it has been pending for almost 12 years now.
A Copy of this Order be sent to the concerned Court. The Special Leave Petitions are disposed of accordingly.
(SUSHMA KUMARI BAJAJ) (ANAND PRAKASH) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT BRANCH OFFICER