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 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt. T Jayamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 8 November, 2023

Author: B M Shyam Prasad

Bench: B M Shyam Prasad

                                    -1-
                                                  NC: 2023:KHC:39909
                                                WP No. 10173 of 2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                 DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
                                 BEFORE
                 THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
                   WRIT PETITION NO. 10173 OF 2021 (ULC)
            BETWEEN:

            1.    SMT. T JAYAMMA
                  W/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY
                  AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
                  R/AT 120/1, 4TH CROSS
                  V YELLAPPA REDDY COLONY
                  ANNASANDRA PALYA,
                  HAL POST
                  BENGALURU - 560 017.

            2.    SMT. Y RADHA
                  D/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY
                  W/O LATE MUNIREDDY
                  AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
                  R/AT SWETHA NILAYA
                  1ST CROSS, BEHIND RAMA
                  TEMPLE ANNASANDRA PALYA
Digitally         HAL POST
signed by
NARASIMHA         BENGALURU - 560 017.
MURTHY
VANAMALA
Location:
HIGH        3.    SHRI Y BABU REDDY
COURT OF          S/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY
KARNATAKA
                  AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
                  R/AT 120/1, 4TH CROSS,
                  V YELLAPPA REDDY COLONY
                  ANNASANDRA PALYA
                  HAL POST
                  BENGALURU - 560 017.
                         -2-
                                         NC: 2023:KHC:39909
                                   WP No. 10173 of 2021




4.   SMT. Y SUSHEELA
     D/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
     R/AT 55/56 JAI BHUBANESHWARI
     LAYOUT, 6TH CROSS,
     CAMBRIDGE COLLEGE ROAD
     K R PURAM, BENGALURU - 560 036.

5.   SHRI Y RAMASHEKAR REDDY
     S/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY,
     AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
     R/AT NO. 120/1, 4TH CROSS,
     V YELLAPPA REDDY COLONY
     ANNASANDRA PALYA, HAL POST
     BENGALURU - 560 017.
6.   SMT. Y BHARATHI
     D/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
     R/AT 321, 8TH CROSS,
     SHIVANANDA NAGAR
     BEHIND BEML QUARTERS
     NEW THIPPASANDRA
     BENGALURU - 560 075.


7.   SHRI Y CHANDRAPPA REDDY
     S/O LATE YELLAPPA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
     R/AT 120/1, 4TH CROSS
     V YELLAPPA REDDY COLONY
     ANNASANDRA PALYA, HAL POST
     BENGALURU - 560 017.

                                       ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI.DEEPAK GADIYA, ADVOCATE)
                           -3-
                                             NC: 2023:KHC:39909
                                         WP No. 10173 of 2021




AND:

1.   THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REVENUE DEPARTMENT
     VIDHANA SOUDHA
     DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
     BENGALURU - 560 001.
     BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

2.   THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
     (FORMERLY FOR UBAN LAND CEILING)
     BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT
     BENGALURU.

3.   THE TAHSILDAR
     BANGALORE EAST TALUK
     K R PURAM
     BENGALURU - 560 036
                                        ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.BHOJEGOUDA T KOLLER., AGA)


       THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT THE
RESPONDENTS TO RESTORE THE LANDS OF THE
PETITIONERS    COVERED          BY    NOTIFICATION    AT
ANNEXURE C.


       THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING,    THIS   DAY,   THE        COURT   MADE    THE
FOLLOWING:
                             -4-
                                              NC: 2023:KHC:39909
                                           WP No. 10173 of 2021




                          ORDER

The petitioners, who assert are the legal heirs of Sri V Yallappa Reddy, have sought for directions to restore certain extent of lands in Sy. Nos.106/1A, 188/3, 108/3, 113/14, 125, 125/3 and 149/2 of Vibuthipura Village, K R Puram Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluk [now Bengaluru East Taluk], and these lands are referred to as 'the schedule properties'.

2. The petitioners assert that when the proceedings under the Urban Land [Ceiling and Regulation] Act, 1976 [for short, 'the ULC Act'] was initiated, Sri V Yallappa Reddy attended the proceedings but could not continue participating because of ill health, and as such, the notification under Section 10[1] and Section 10[3] of the ULC Act are issued on 08.01.1993 and respectively 03.06.1994. The petitioners contend that though the notification under Section 10[3] of the ULC Act is issued, neither award is passed nor possession of the subject property is taken, and in fact, the petitioners -5- NC: 2023:KHC:39909 WP No. 10173 of 2021 contend that notice under Section 10[5] of the ULC Act is also not issued. The petitioners rely upon the RTCs for the aforesaid lands to justify possession of the subject properties.

3. On 25.01.2023, this Court, observing that the dispute could be easily addressed if a Court Commissioner inspects the subject properties and files a report as regards the nature of the subject properties and the construction if any thereon, has appointed the concerned Assistant Director of Land Records/City Surveyor, K R Puram to inspect the subject properties and file a report. The Assistant Director of Land Records, Bengaluru East Taluk, has filed a report enclosing the sketches. The sketches enclosed to the report read as follows: -6-

NC: 2023:KHC:39909 WP No. 10173 of 2021
1.Sy. No. 106/1A
2. Sy No. 188/3
3.Sy. No. 108/3 -7- NC: 2023:KHC:39909 WP No. 10173 of 2021
4. Sy. No. 113/14
5. Sy. Nos.

125/1, 125/3

6. Sy. No. 149/2 -8- NC: 2023:KHC:39909 WP No. 10173 of 2021

4. The Court Commissioner is categorical in his opinion that the entire extents in the subject properties are constructed. It is salient that with the Urban Land [Ceiling and Regulation] Repeal Act, 1999 coming into effect, the proceedings would lapse and the Government cannot assert any vested right therein if the possession of the subject property is not taken. In the light of this report, this Court must opine that the State cannot assert any right in the subject properties consequent to the notification under Section 10[3] of the ULC Act and the petition must be disposed of accordingly. This Court must observe that this disposal cannot vindicate the petitioners' title to, or possession of, any portion of the subject properties especially when the Court Commissioner has observed that he is not able to say that the petitioners are in possession of some portions of the subject properties. -9-

NC: 2023:KHC:39909 WP No. 10173 of 2021 The petition stands disposed of subject to the observations as aforesaid.

Sd/-

JUDGE AN/-