IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARIIATAKA, BANGALORE
mrmn THIS THE 13TH DAY or APRIL 2009
BEFORE
THE HONBLE ma. JUSTICE RAM moaaxwaishbaij .
wan 1=E___g;_1jr1on xo.14449 osEA1_geq5 _.(§._._"g_1.nJ:;En; " 'V J :'
BETWEEN
SR1 13 R RAVI, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS _
s/0 LATE A RANGASWAMY _
NO 50, 2ND MAIN ROAD' ' u
RAMACHANDRAPURAM ' "
BANGALORE 560 021.
E'ETI'I'IONER
(By Sri: A_BH_1NA$*"'R1«.a{<:<:UmR__ea KUMAR, ADVS.)
AND:
1 THE JOIN'I'»CO'MMi3SIONER
_':B;¢\I*§(}ALORE"EviAHANAGARA PALIKE
LGANDHEJAGAR SUB DEVISION
' . ''D1R~'.1f.'c3..'M RQYAN ROAD, BANGALORE.
2 " . ' THE' AS$§SffANT REVENUE OFFICER
--4:}A§;.:2HVI;wAGAR, DR 'I'.C.M ROYAN ROAD
BANGALORE.
' * %---at-jgm K SATHYANARAYANA
=5.-C»E13 ABOUT 36 YEARS
S/G KANNAN @ RAMA NAIDU
NO 34/4 2ND CROSS, SAIBABANAGAR,
SRIRAMPURAM,
BANGALORE 560 021. RESPQNDENTS
(By Sri : M N RAMANJANEYA GOWDA, AIJV FOR R1 8:. 2)
(BY SR1. U PANDURANGA NAYAK, ADV FOR R3)
3%
THIS WRIT PE'rmoN ES FILED UNDER AR1t:€L_jE«s'o22.6"'
AND 227 OF' THE CONSTITUTION OF' INDIA P?-EAYIDECE' E-
QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BYHfI'H-.§:1'R'2 mt» _
3.9.2004 AT ANNEXURE J ANE) THE. »oRD1ER"'PA$sEo'.,B~{ '
THE RI 131'. 20.7.2006 WHICH HASIBEEN COM:MUN!CATED
TO THE PETITIONER BY VIRTUE "OF;'AI\.I*' Eré.ooRsEME'N°zf-_A
Q'I'.21.'?'.2006 AT ANNEXURE Ki AND'VRE'S_'I'OREV_TH'E KH.=8{l'A
ENTRIES IN RESPECT OF THEE1sr;HEom.E PRoPE;z'§yV,
THIS PETITION, ooM1No"'«.,or~s,_ FOR «E :P1éELiM1NARY
HEARING IN 'E' GROUP; 5m1s'.AoAYoE%?HEEA_oooR'1oo-o;vmoE THE
FOLLOWING: ;
__c_3._m,) E.'
The coder dated 21-07-
QOO6 petition under
SeCtioI1 3_1:4-1'-'V1 Municipa} Corporations
Act, 1.9'? 6 for_§3E1o.rt A;1;"' confirming the transfer of
$11!; nafiié'"of the 3rd respondent in respect of
Nos.32 and 33, 31′” Main Road,
Bangalore, as disciosed in the
“‘«__ ‘e1f:<1ors':;c:1:§5E;oI1t dated 3-9-2004 A1mexure–"J", has
A prefefred this Writ petition.
2. The erstwhile Corporation of the City of
Bangalore, by endorsement dated 17- 12- 1965
UK
Axmextue-“C”, informed A. Rangaswamy, the petitioxiaefs
father that the Katha of the property bearing V.
Main Road, Ramaehandrapuram in 4th ‘Divisioii ‘% V’
transferred into his name
Corporation subject to payment”.__of’.V_balaoees/
charges of Rs.357/-, having pvo:jehased* ‘Hfioder
a Iegjstered Saie Deeti…_ eiieetlted by
Mohammed Pyaru, who, the property
under _’1é’-O2-1963 executed by
Mannu _ and testament of Smt.
Venkfaiamms, imofzoyable property bearing No.32, II
V. measuring 109» x 60′,
I in favour of the said A.Rangaswamy.
_ CoI1″seqL1ent :i1Apon the death of A. Rangaswamy, eeztain
:_.;:jersons”‘iI”1stit:1ted O.S.No. meow 1995 before the Add}.
Judge, Mayo Hal}, Bangalore, for mandatory
VT ” in”3’oI1efion and possession of the promrty
V 3 Munieipai No.32 in Sy.No.6’7 measuring 8′ North to
South and 27’ East to West, was dismissed by judginent
and decree dated 12-O3-2003, without ciistt.”1.;jbii:1§f’£i}inei– r.i.1v§ngsoiiVg11t for review of the said order,
‘Hens. fegeeted %Vb3r_if.~11e order ArmeXure~”‘K”.
3, ‘examination of the order impugled does not
V’ “.[_’a:{1ifi;.ateH an enquiry by the Joint Commissioner
to the transfer of Katha into the name of A.
“‘V.sf§a11gaswamy in the year 1965, in terms of the
endorsement Am1exure-“C”, in respect of ?roperty
M
nu’ \
No.33. The Joint Ccmmissioner, Without
as to the fate of the katha macgé’ ‘the
Rangaswamy in respect of an
cursory and superficial S the V
pe:t:itioner’s claim to I’€§<?<3t -§_'etiticii;'
4. Havillgw i1oticeti’:.– the i order
impugned, directed the
BBMP to Katha transfer in
respec’:L_of.. pursuant to which, on 9-4-
QO09, 1ea1’11,§:d BBMP made a submission
i’orderV.’daicd__A$5-03-2009 could not w complied
wit%:_,siI1cc,”ttiévrcg’sters are not traced, and in that View
cf directicn was issued to file. an aflidavit:
{cf aéiicsjixgrisibie oflicer of the BBMP in that regard, on
i.,i_”.’.3-°(‘)’–‘-!.a-2d4()9. Today, Icamed counsel for the BBMP files
sfiidavit of ens Smt. N.S. Shanta, W/o. N.S. Krishna
‘4 said to be the Assistant Revenue Ofiicer, BBMP,
Ward No.25, Gandhinagar, interatia stating thus:
M
“S. I submit that this Honble
directed the BBMP to produce the Katha u~a;;gi¢gg’:-
file and Katha Iegister relating to fiansier ‘ is
katha in the name of Rangastyamy. 3 * V
that, pursuant to the dizectize-11 I:’1§on._.’:bie».vV:L”V ‘V 1
Coint through my subordinateV_’t”;t3:1ee_ ‘zelafing to
transfer of Katha of in
bi’ the same. I
siibniit that thy my superior oficers
that kept at Koramangaia
to-fliee aide! Aisortie eki “files were destroyed during
‘zeez due: ta’ ‘110Ii–availaibi}ity of space to keep
..Vs11§2}:at ‘hjtige_ number of files. I submit that I
Ipuay for 2 weeks time to Search at
Komu:1a1:ga}a ofiice where some old files are
kefit. I am praying 2 Weeks time as myself and
* r 4_ mffofice stafi’ are engaged in parliament general
election training work. I submit that for the
above genuine reasons 1 ooulé not pmdfuee the
Katha transfer file and Katha register on 9-4-
2809 on the last date of hearing and I humbly
prays this Hc.m’ble Court to accept the above
M
cause for :rzo11~P!’oduct;ioz:1 of the flies and R’ ”
accordingly.”
5. The writ petition was rue; T12§’1o;2{>o6oc
Statement of objections of’ é;–6- ‘V
2007 while that of mi o1~2:»0%s»2007.
The crux of the ” -ggmexure-“C”,
endorsement, ‘V VIVBBMP did. not
advert to Vjebjections, for obvious
reasons.” the said records, a
very stating that the order
dated 25-O3:2_()O9_ be complied as the registers
a_t1r:’ace&abIeV. A”‘iiVa:’e reading of paragaph 5 of the
not instill confidence in the mind
of It is not known. as to Whether the
‘u’ieponenfif’condueted the Search personally or through
V’ officers. What is not forthcoming are the
names and desigxations of the officials; the date on
which the Search was commenced and concluded. It is
not known as to Where the files relating to the 4’31
M
Division of the Corporation of the City of Bangalore, of
the year 1965, are preserved. The ciaim of the deponent
to have made a thorough Search in my opixiiorij V.
an eye-Wash, since the register relating to
files is not forthcoming, and é_
nature of business transacted,
katha department of the It that V
the ofiieers manning’ the,.i)epa”fi ;’e,4g31;;f:”i1ave tekefi to their
duties 1 H irery. iv; » V ho responsibiiity or
aeeounta.15i1itjI,’ unfortunate situatien
where eitizei”13_:of the ifleifiigalore city have to redress their
V’ by the writ jurisdiction of this
pertaining to katha Uansfer.
writ petition is allowed. The impugned
Anvsnexure “K” is quashed and the proceeding
to the Jeint Commissioner for enquiry afresh
efter securing the records relating to the icatha
endorsement Am1exure–“C” and thereafter to pass
M