Karnataka High Court
M K Shanthakumar vs The District Registrar Shimoga Dist on 10 March, 2008
Author: K.L.Manjunath
Bench: K.L.Manjunath
_h--5
?HE HQM'£LE HR. 3u3?xcz _g.L.MAw3ux§?a*f~_
H E§".€'W£ $531
m K fiHfifi?HAKfiMAE _ _
fiffl Kfllfififihfi gay ss??w«_<.'
? YEAR3, His "§aNEsH"_,"
x ifi?, Vifififihfifififlfi} fisaaa ',u,*
flfilfiflfik EI3TRECT ¥IN:§??éBl,*J}_
_*V_ ;""*»j "jz,.; ?£?ITIDNER
gay firi R asfigyg Avvafiafiny-'wk. '
i-
'x
\
E
33.9%) 2
29%
~m1E"T':;.~.::;§s:~za3;ti%sé " --i::~z§'z.a;;:':a*z°xe2a;i:a; '
£HxM$@A=§I$?»% _' '
3%I%$$a«§?2*2§1'<
F %w3'?a?a??.Ifi3?aé?3a fififififihb 9?
;aa$xs%aa?2a$gzwvgnnzsawcai
;<,3z§aA@0aK~B:§:fi1$w
Bfiflfifihofifl
'[3 PTHE EUEwREGIfiTRAR
V_;m3LUK_wfif1cE cunpoumn
fiA5HR¢51? 401 ;
4 v" ... RESPGNDENTS
°=;"n{3y flri.'H.T"JNHRENDRA Pnasan, Heap}
.' ' "=~TH1s w.e FILEE unnma ARTICLEE 226 AND 227 or
'-. '%waE EQNSTITUTIDN OF Iflfllh To QUASH THE onnmn
. Efjfifi ,. "E3333 3.5? THE R2 , I '#3 BASE
H G
77 ;;1;. ,r1 9;' 23143;" 1§f!,f2fl05~D6, 'VIBE ANN--H
Mill! 351.533-'C3 QUAEH THE ORDER DT.15.6.20C|5 PASSED B?
W...m_.' . 6;&%QI*_L.1'.9.0;*':.>'5;Q.3!£» :§f!_?'£_ 3',!§i) A.' } %
I13
""9" 3.1, 1!'! CASE fl9a$'P.?,'4.5-.1'.{3}:SGR:1=2£394--Q5
I IICI
VIBE ANN-G AND ETC.
This petition coming on for préiiminqry
h-axing in 'B' Gran; this Q-v~ eh; Teart5£;Q§a§hg
II? I I
£alldwing:-
-T . 6. zafi: case. 165:1.-?h§iéi""
hi
Thera4ft9£9.,. ;§ fi6t:i£ é_'1;tV§1d'u.f ;§§ction 45 ms': a the
m-n.:.ga%T»agamp gates' 29" April 2004 was
iasfiafi *%by. "fih§ *Lhi5trict Registrar, shimnga,
stating" fihat-- thé documnnt presented by the
7§§ti$ianor xfar" registration did not show the
V iaatu.g;1%:§:a;¢kot value -at the property. The
.V_fi§ti§fiénfirV sent a reply on 6.5.2904 and
fhoigaffiar. the nistrict Rngiatrar determined the
x 'm§rE§t 'value at the proparty purchaaad by the
fiétitienax :1; 2:42 1:12!!! calling ggan than
fietitianar he pay the dirfiarance er fiaricit seam;
dufiy. h§§*iivid "" the arfier aassia av tha
District Registrar, he filed an appeal before the
'%{
Q
-mnteiligencai. Ber-filers, which ='~3:ea-.1 came to
'ue ciismisseci on 7.5.2666 ii per-
challenginq these turn orders, the
petition is riled.
registered lease ieeae tieeci.
Indian oi1_:"c_erpn£'etiQ§nV_:'1539' to put up
cunstrua:*.:§;%,en':5935 :.: Accordingly, the
dee;e_:uhiu:" Etna petitioner by the
Intfian to run the petrol pump and
thenea_£tnrg'~~..nEu§' structure was built by the
p1eti1;ioner" 'eii cost. As per the term: and
"c$n&:!itiena the lease deed, Indian 011
was entitled to remove the structure
al. It is the case of the petitioner that
what was purchased by him was only a vacant site
gnu'. 1:": e l_aui;nling. Que to dispute between him
48/
uln-
aiifi fifii HE. G" ~'
E:
2?
of the site and an inn éafigzliinf: 16¢'i§it'i 'fir.
Guruprasad, the procoodinga in quan«i:i--nfn_V"*yaa
initiated by the District. noqistra::";:~--
that the term: and conditi-any off"i:he::'.';lnitn§..Vwnné»
not wnaidorad and that mhirkegh ..=}niu'a"~'§i'"'fiha_"2si£e
in question has 313::-'V_ 'n9t Vim-in Vdn'n9aJ;%mi.!!9¢i,
patitinnar rnquustnd nigtni-Li: 'nonistrar ta
drag: the procnadii:n§..g'. were also
advanced tmfoze But both
'~33! conaidarnd the
avjectinnn-K",'"i?n*ieé:.i5."vn.V"'i.;*s§rn~ 'Ythé 9etininnn:_r= mas
and tn§--4.Vven;io;: k-*'.:nho petitioner, which discloses
transactian between Indian Oil
':V"'*3qrp¢ra'_s§.ien and Rachappa. Ii' Rachappa ha
=:".parvni'§:todi::'V'nhe Indian oil corporation to put up
ihénnénx-uétion at its cost, it cannot be contended
* Vina registering authority that what was sold
tn: petitioner: is also inclusive oi' the
building. From looking into» the schedule at the
gala dam and tram tho orders of tho niatrict
R.-l-ginrti-ax, it in glen: that gzggggdings 'arc
If
ahjaqtians raised my the potitiunar~ aha xpot
oonaidorod by both the paztioa, thi§tt§fittT$§=§£
the opinion that lmnexurogG_§gtQd71$§§;206§ {fi6t =
Annoxuro4H dated T.d.2§O6 =.fiu$atd ' by jwtho
respondents 1 and 2 and gpquirnfi ta=§i}gQg§fi§d§
allawafi. Annaxuro?u fi§fi¢&ti$Fé;fififi5 and Annexati- I-I data 1. 44j;t2po6;*gs§aa'g:i%:' byV:t.ho«,Ttttpondtnts 1 and 2 are pat§h§iguath§d; Ttétmtitfit is remanded to the H17#*4t¢§g9§dtfit) ftfii titan conaiuoration in acég:u,nz$<x:V&'v--".re:=;t_th It is made clue: that any amofifit, depesittd tfif" the petitioner pursuant to 'ya prfifirtpafisté fit the authorities bulaw shall . "'t"h§ éfibjhgt tdwthd result of the pracoadinga.
Sd/--
Judge M513