Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri H R Jagadish vs The Town Municipal Council on 23 October, 2013

Author: H.G.Ramesh

Bench: H.G.Ramesh

                           -1-
                                       WP No.30570/2012



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

       DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2013

                        BEFORE

          THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.G.RAMESH

              W.P.No.30570/2012 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN

1.     SRI H.R.JAGADISH
       S/O LATE H.C.RAMACHANDRAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

2.     SRI H.R.SATISH
       S/O LATE H.C.RAMACHANDRAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS

3.     SMT.H.R.DEVAKI
       S/O LATE H.C.RAMACHANDRAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

4.     SMT.H.R.CHANCHALA
       S/O LATE H.C.RAMACHANDRAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

5.     SMT.H.R.GEETHA
       S/O LATE H.C.RAMACHANDRAIAH
       AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

ALL ARE R/AT CINEMA ROAD
DODDABALLAPUR
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT             .... PETITIONERS

(BY SRI V.KESHAVA RAO MOHITHA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
       DEVANAHALLI
       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       PRESIDENT AND
                             -2-
                                           WP No.30570/2012



  2.     THE CHIEF OFFICER
         TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
         DEVANAHALLI                  .....RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI SUNIL.S.RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
    SRI T.SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

     THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS
TO CHANGE THE KHATA OF THE SCHEDULE PROPERTY IN
FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS BY QUASHING THE ORDERS
PASSED BY R2, DATED 15.2.2011, PRODUCED AT ANN-F &
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY THE COSTS OF THIS PETITION
& GRANT OTHER RELIEFS.

    THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B'
GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                         ORDER

H.G.RAMESH, J. (Oral):

Heard. It is not in dispute that the impugned order dated 15.02.2011 (Annexure-F) passed by the respondent- Municipality is not in accordance with section 113 of the Karnataka Municipalities Act, 1964. Hence, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the respondent-Municipality for reconsideration in accordance with law. The matter shall be reconsidered by the respondent-Municipality expeditiously and in accordance with law and in any event within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners shall -3- WP No.30570/2012 furnish a copy of this order to the respondent-Municipality for reconsidering the matter within the time stipulated above. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
Petition disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Yn.