High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Jayamma vs The Commissioner on 19 December, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Jayamma vs The Commissioner on 19 December, 2008
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
IN '£'HE HEGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DA'i'ED THIS THE 19:11 DAY OF DECEMBER 2908  "[;=_ .

BEFORE    
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE A;_IfF_J.GUNJ2?£L.  *

WRIT PETITION N0.1622Q/2 O()8(BI5 A)- %   '  

BETWEEN :

Sm.t.Jayamma.,

Wife of Srifiamaiah,

Aged about 49 years,
No.123, agma  :  --, 
(marenahalli), _  

Bangalore - 560,{)4Q;:'--  _.  ~  " §;.PE'FYFiONER

(By:S:'i'.2'&..:Sgai Firiégkegshg'-.§d*éL_)""" 
Aim:   % %

1. The Commissjorzér, '
Bangalore Develnpmtmt

." V'  -Authbr-§.'ty, Kumar.*3§'Park
* _ »West Extmlsion,

' %BaI1g81orc. 

 Acquisition Officer,
"Bangalazie Development

 4 v»A1it'hofity, Kumara Park

' W'estA' Extension,

A'   Bangalore. ...RESPONDEN'i'S

(By Sri.K.Krishna, Adv.)



 This writ petition is flied under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution ef India with a prayer to direct

the respondents to alkot a suitable site and to executes».

registered absolute sale deed in favour of the petititiiier-VTA4
in lieu of the acquisition of the residenfia} ho_use« ;_.
N<).8, formed in Katha Ne.I56, Assessment E-Ie.35]"1,"t "

situated at Chikkanahalli village, Ramasand:"s;- Qhak'a31e,.

Sulikere Panchayat, Kengeri Hob1:i',""'Bang;al0re_x'South'.
Taluk measuring East-West 30 feet and.-'North-South~V 40 1.',
feet, having pumhased the same its eariier owne;;'..,V "

through the registered absolute sale deeé dated

15.12.1995 vicle document No;'1.062 1/9E':=–96..1}egi*ste:*ed
in the Ofiiee of the Sub-Regist1*ar,'Keflgeri, "Bangalore as
PEI' Annexure 'A'. *

This writ petition ' eeininé jpreliminary
hearing, this day, the Courtvmiacie fenewmg:

7ef[;OREEReCtsJ
Mr.K; is directed to take

notice f0f:'V17§3S§~'?0I;£1:ei%¥'i~t§-A " t

sppearing for the petitioner is

f:Je._meme"ef appearance within four weeks.

'' th<;:ugh, the matter is listed for

~ hearing, with consent:,.i.t is taken up for

fhealsdiéposaiw

-3-

4. The petitioxier claims to have purchased a
revenue site No.8 formed in Katha No.156, Assessment

No.35/1 situated at Chikkanahelli village, Raxriasangizra

Dhakale, Sulikere Panchayat, Kengeri Hobli,

South Taluk, Bangalore. Sufiioe it to say 1 M

site along with other sites was to

the purpose of fur1:heif._ e§{‘teIieion ” ”

M.Vishveshwara:iah Layout It V ” the . jhpefigioiier
has given an «for aliotriient of
an alternate site. The 3. notice to

the })f:ii’I1i;.lOI7i(:I’.VV to produce certain

documents. has also produced the

-V as on 10.03.2006. It appears me
another representatiee on 26.09.2006

of an aiternate site. The
‘gijievagiceviiiyof petitioner is that even as on today, her
have not been considered. Hence, this

i ‘ petition.

5. The acquisition proceedings were subject matter

of a batch of Writ petitiozis said this Court in the ease of

/’

Jurqjamma and others Vfif Bangalore Development

Authority reported in ILR 2005 KAI-I 608 has upheity

the acquisitien proceedings. But however, has &ViS$$L1éL’§:f ”

certairl directions.

6. Consequently, petifion sta1§€:1s« . ‘V

directing the respondents to conside15$;t1e-jfepresVefitatioi;:””-.

of the mtitzioner in the light of
this Court in the aforesmd’ j2,_:&dg111’e’r1t;.I’:4 * V%
Cornpliance in three —

7. “couixsel appearing for the
respondents _ ” ‘file his power in the

Judge

s