Karnataka High Court
Smt Jayaprada vs The State Of Karnataka on 28 January, 2013
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JANUARY 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION NOs. 49127-49141/2012 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Jayaprada,
W/o. S. Palaniswamy,
33 Years, No. 43/13,
II Main, Marenahalli,
Vijayanagar, Bangalore-40
Represented by S. Palaniswamy,
S/o. C. Selvaraj, Aged 38 Years.
2. D.Dayalan,
S/o. Doraiswami,
Aged 49 years, R/at C.121
2nd Cross, Robertson Block,
I Main Road, R.C.Pura,
Bangalore-560 021.
3. Guna,
W/o. Dalayan,
Aged about 43 years,
R/at C.121, 2nd Cross,
Robertson Block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-560 021.
4. G. Shanta,
W/o. Late M. Perumal,
Aged 40 years, R/at 439,
50' Road, Muneswara Block,
GEF Post, Bangalore-26.
5. K. Subramani,
S/o. Late Kuppaswamy,
2
Aged 62 years, R/at C.136,
III Cross, 2nd Cross,
Robertson Block, I Main,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
6. R. Velu,
S/o. Late Ratnam,
Aged 53 Years, R/at 3rd Cross,
Robertson Block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
7. Gunashekar,
S/o. R. Velu, Aged 24 Years,
R/o. at C. 136, 3rd Cross,
Robertson Block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
8. M. Kannagi,
W/o. R. Mohan, Aged 37 Years,
No.7/1, II Main, 2nd Cross,
Robertson block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
9. Triveni,
W/o. Jayaraman,
Aged 40 years, No. 136, 3rd Cross,
Robertson block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
10. J. Vijay Kumar,
S/o. Jayaram Mudaliar,
Aged 44 Years, No.55, II Main,
Robertson block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
11. Chandramma,
W/o. K. Subramani,
Aged 55 Yesrs, No. C136, 3rd Cross,
Robertson block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
3
12. K. Bhaskar,
S/o. K. Subramanian,
Aged 38 years, No.10/1,
3rd New Kalappa Block,
Robertson block, I Main Road,
R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
13. V. Manjunath
S/o. N. Vadivelu Mudliar,
Aged 35 Years, No. 10/1,
3rd New Kalappa Block,
I Main Road, R.C. Pura, Bangalore-21.
14. Shobarani,
W/o. Radhakrishna,
Aged 28 years, No. 17, 3rd Cross,
Sai Baba Nagar, Sriramapura,
Bangalore-560 021.
15. Sri. M. Mohan,
S/o. Munirathenam,
Aged 34 years, R/at 43/13,
II Main, Marenahalli, Vijayanagar,
Bangalore-560 040. : Petitioners
(By Shri. R.P. Somashekaraiah, Advocate)
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka,
Represented by its Secretary,
M.S. Building, Bangalore-01.
2. Bangalore, Bruhath Bengaluru
Mahanagara Palika,
Represented by its Commissioner,
N.R. Square, Bangalore-560 001.
3. Assistant Revenue Officer,
4
Rajarajeshwari Sub-Division,
Ward No.69, Bruhath Bengaluru
Mahanagara Palike,
Bangalore-560 079. : Respondents
(By Shri. Vijayakumar. A. Patil, HCGP., for R1
Shri. B.V. Muralidhar, Advocate for R2 & R3)
These Writ Petitions are filed under Articles 226 &
227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct
Respondent No.3 Assistant Revenue Officer, Ward No.69,
BBMP, Bangalore, not to collect property assessment tax
and other tax etc, for the sites of the persons/parties from
which they got the site/land from one Venkataramanappa
in the land bearing Sy. No.84/1, situated at Laggere
Village, Yeshwanthpura hobli, Bangalore North Taluk.
These writ petitions coming on for preliminary
hearing, this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The Petitioners are before this Court seeking for issuance of mandamus to the third respondent and to direct the third respondent not to collect property assessment tax and other taxes for the sites from the persons who have purchased the same from Shri Venkataramanappa in the land bearing Survey No. 84, new Survey No. 84/1, situated at Laggere village, Yeshwanthapur Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. 5
2. The case of the Petitioners is that they are the bonafide purchasers of the sites in the year 1990 and were paying property tax to the erstwhile Dasharahalli Municipality. Subsequent thereto, they contend that the property taxes are now being paid to he BBMP in respect of the properties owned by them. The Petitioners further contend that the sites have been purchased by them from one Shri Krishnappa, in whose favour occupancy rights have been granted in respect of the land bearing Survey No.84/1 of Laggere Village, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The dispute relates to the said property wherein one Shri Venkataramanappa claimed certain rights in respect of the very same property. The order dated 31.11.2011 passed by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, in Miscellaneous Appeal No.01/2008-09 (Annexure-B) to the petition is referred. In that context, the Petitioners contend that certain persons who claim to have purchased the sites from Shri. Venkataramanappa are paying taxes in respect of the property over which they have no right whatsoever and it 6 is in that circumstance, the Petitioners claim that the third respondent be directed not to collect taxes from the persons who have purchased the property from said Venkataramanappa.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents would point out that so far as the assessment of payment of the tax is concerned, the same has been assessed as contemplated under Section 108-A of the Karnataka Municipal Act and in that circumstance, the persons claiming to be the owners of the property and their name being included in the record are entitled to pay taxes and the taxes paid by them would be accepted.
4. If these aspects of the matter are kept in view, the contentions put forth by the petitioners would indicate that there are two sets of site purchasers viz., one claiming under Krishnappa and the other claiming under Venkataramanappa. In such circumstance, neither the third respondent nor this Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article- 226 of the Constitution of India, 7 can consider and decide the disputed question relating to the title to the property. Therefore, at this juncture, the only question that arises for consideration is as to:
"Whether the prayer as made in the writ petition, directing the third respondent not to collect the property assessment tax and other taxes from any persons who have purchased the property from Shri. Venkataramanappa could be issued?"
5. In my opinion, when the title to the property is disputed and the details relating to the katha standing in the name of any person maintained in the records of the BBMP is not forthcoming/evident, this Court cannot issue such direction. However, it would be open for the petitioners to secure necessary details from the BBMP with regard to the assessment of the tax in respect of the property and the revenue documents standing in the name of such persons relating to the property in question in the records maintained by the BBMP and thereafter, the petitioners shall avail their remedy in accordance with law 8 to question the same before the competent authority by making necessary persons as parties to those proceedings.
In terms of the above liberty to the petitioners, these writ petitions stand disposed of. No Order as to the costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE Vr