Smt Chinnamma vs Special Deputy Commissioner on 13 July, 2010

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Chinnamma vs Special Deputy Commissioner on 13 July, 2010

Bench: Anand Byrareddy

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13" DAY OF ~ 
BEFORE %  V V' T   _
THE HON'BLE MR. 
WRIT PETETION N(),au1.9 I <'H)'d. F"2009     V
BETWEEN:      

E. Smt. Chinnamma  _ _ g_' 1
W/0 Late P. Lakshmana,  V

Aged 74 yams,  V V
H.L.  ~     "" H
S/0 Lime PL'''Laks--h.:11é':i.é;, ;  

E\)

Avgedv   -. '

3.   a  T 
S/0' 1,21%; P.' L_21'k--shz1j1a1in_21§ ' V'
Aged a.b()ut 40 __ye:'.'-u's',«  -7

 V.  E t(),_'33¥re$iT«f;lcr1_ts of Sack:-ri'nangaIa Vi liage,
 KR. 'Pump 
 jBangalg>£e,_E3.é'é ..T&{LIk

PinE"5__6()"('}37_,.__  ...PETI.TI'ONERS

V . (By §}11fi."M.S:.vVaradarajan, Advocaie)

 



AND:

ix)

Ix)

Special Deputy Commissioner,
Bangalore U'rba.n District.
K.G. Road,

Bangalore ~«- 560 009.

Assistant Crmimissioner,
Bangaloie North Division,
Podium Block,

Dr. Ambedkar Road,
Bangalere -- 560 00].

Revenue Inspector,

Whitefield Circle; 
K.R.Puram Hobli, '' 'M _  
Bangalore East Talu.k:_._"_  '
Pm 560 037:    

Sim.iVYeA.liv3_;n1IiVé1V,'  .
Vi?'/('i-Latte Chi'z1ri::pp'¢1-,._.'"'~- ' '
Aged 68 ye;1V:'5.i,..jf. "  
R/0 Floodi G3ifde1_1é,~...'

5 Iioodi V;r.1.;:ge;'
_" '2}haCI<éVapiIa*z»...P0st,
    I~:l0bli,
 ii " V B'a.ng:.1.vli;;:fe 'East Taluk,
 %rPm;'e:s6§orQ37.

 Suit. Pziehzirnma,

V'v.'/Q'? Late Muniyappzk.

V A' '*-._Aged about 49 years,

P _,7R/0 Thigalarapalya.

Hoodi Village,
M ahadevzzpura Post,



KR. Puram Hobli,
Bangz1E01"e East Taluk.
Pin: 560 037.

Smt. Munamma.
W/0 N-ar1jz,1ppa.
Agad 47 years.

R/0 Hebbal Villagaa,
Yelahanka Hobli,

Bangalore North Taluk.  

Smt. Muniyellzlmma,
W/0 Krishnappal, V  
Aged 45 years, 
Smt. G0w1ja'm_ma, H
W/0 Murjviyﬁppa,  L
Aged 43  .' Q  V. 

S i*191't'.'V[l'2':A::§T22thz1 iifgfzézi; ' ' »  _
W/0 V'eI1katas-w'amy;.TV  ' '
 4-I    

7 to 9A.:'esidenut"s of i"IvG0d§"-Gzirdens,

 ' 10. 

 V. A H'0(}»di:.Vi__iiage, N[h£ﬁ1£1d_CV.11pU}'£i Post,
 'VK.R§L"Pu1*3:m 14a'oma,
V' Ba hga Ion: 'ﬂﬁstfal uk,
 

 Smt. Néelamma,

W_/0'1~Late Anjanappa,

 " *»,_Ag'é<i 36 years,
 MAR/0 Kunlbaiahaliy Viiiage,

Hosakote Taluk,
Pin: 562 1.14.



ll.

12.

Respond.ei2t .No; 'l- to  anti' "

Srnt. Saltarnma.

W/o Krishnappa.
Major,

R_/o Koncliz-attahally,
Tekal. Maloor Taluk,

Kola; District. Pin: 57} SE2.

Smt. Sarojamma,

W/o Manjttnath,

Major,

Hebbal Village,
Yelah:.tn_l<21 I-Iobli,

Ban galore North Taluk.

The Tahsildar, _. _ --_
Bangalore East Taltak,-2. V V
K:'"lSl'1I]EiF£1_]'Eip£.tl'3.1T1,:-"H  -- 
Bangalore 037. =: 

  it 2. . RESPONDENTS

(By Government Advocate for Relspondent N o.4 to E2 W Served) ~m$+$$ .T..l1i.s Wlfit..lPetiti()nlés tiled under Articles 226 and 227 of the Cc)nst~i,tL1f;io:1t)t' hi<'I;'-z1,._p1i21ying to quash the impugned order dated 2 03.Vl2.2O'08 passed by the I" respondent in Revision Petition l\lo.'3Ef)54Q(i' i(Az1Vnexure--A) and etc., is "This 'Writ: Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 2 it _ 'B' G'--roupithis"lday, the Court made the following: -- OR}3ER 2 Mi-leard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3

2. The petition is considered for final disp0sa.l_ having regard to the facts and circumstances.

3' One Madikztla Muiaiyappfaw was the''p'r<eipr:)s'i'tu_s.Vofvthe . 9 family of the petitkmers. He had ;twhi'e;e"is~(in.si°nan1eiyA Solappa and .Pz1ch21ppa. Jaialainnit-7..s wife they' had two sons namely Chinnappa----and:'i\/Itiniyaiafja;'»Suiappa's wife was Boodaguttamma and Chinnappa.

Pachappa's are Ramaiah and La].<shrnana.=i' it wife and chiidren of to have died on 9.1.1998.

sons of the propositus Madikala Muiiiyappa died nevein earlier to 1960. There was a registered ,,i};721fVTiii[ii1:()l1:ii'(:iT6-'.'5'CiiI"E1iT1(')ngS[ Jalappa, Boodaguttanima and Bheemakka. The'-i'pa1'titiiineisii"registered partition deed. In pursuance of which, _ revenue e---ntrie's came to be made out in the name of the respective :rss,h'are;is. The two survey numbers, namely Survey N0s.57 and 58 «ff.-o'i"§Sadaramangaia Village, K.R.Puram Hobli, Bangalore East 3

4. It not denied that in the above. haick.gi'oui'1d_whereby there. were other ti';-msactions. the petitioners have also-~'jfiiedgiatéivil suit in ().S.No.2864/()5 before the Court of Addit.it§mtiit§:iig+ -:i"iyn fudge, Bangalore. and the same is penidingieotftside19§i'ti(;n."In this 7 View of the matter. as there. is dispute between them'; 'the qtue'stion of title has to be resolved bet'ore'i's»tVh'e» civil iCou'I"t[' Thei'efore, the revenue authorities having'-1'et'uj'sed_ to ~. i11te'1*~fe1'e at the instance. of the petitioners is not f?(.)U1}Ci._[0T'D€ i'i1_egal "('5i=Vii*'1"eig-u'1ar.

5. is disposed of without prejudice to theiihetititiiiersfJ'C2ise.::hef(areithe civil Court in the pending civil The enti'ies_stiejibe' dependant on the result of the suit.

H' ..... v JUDGE

-ii-«1~l..13/4;'...

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court