B D Narasimhamurthy vs Bruhath Bangalore on 23 February, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BAN

DATED THIS THE 23R» DAY OF FEBRUAR.'iQV:2h(§"i()" 

THE I-ION'BLE MR.JUSTICE1;:A'RA;"1:\:(4I'M"(J§IAi';f'_.:filéififfifVi'

WRIT PETITION No.,73_o9 o§"2oo3T%I(1.3;BMFi1H°=  _

BETWEEN

B.D. Narasimhamurthy,"'~..
S / o Late Dyavappa. '' '
Aged about 42 years.
No.200/1. 3*" i'_./Iain.

£3' Cross. Byrasa;é.dra;=__ ._
CV. Raman 'N4agar_--:P.O<.' _  _V ._ _ . V
Bangalore W 550 093 .      ..PE'r1TIoNER

(By SIT.' Rao 81'  

_

.  '   3-.Bru"h.ath BafigaVlore

» I fivlaizafiagara Palike.
 flarxgaioife - 560 002
Rep--res;ented by its
Co1I'Imissio1Ie1".

2. " The Asst. Revenue Officer.

I Bruhath Bangalore
Mahanagara Palike.
Banaswadi Sub--DivI'siorI.
Ward No.83. Dispensary Road.
Bangalore -- 560 001.

3. Smt. Rukrnirai
W/o late BK. Ramanna.
No.4. Beedi Rasthe.  

E 

 K'



Byrasandra.
CV. Raman Nagar P.O..
Bangalore -- 560 093.

(Deleted as per Court order    I '  '  
dated 2.6.2008)   ' 3 

{By Sri. Ashok Harnahallai. Adv. t'or*--R0.'i. &
R2. ' _   .
R3 deleted vide order dated 20L"6V,u2OO8]

This Writ Petiti.o'n.._is flied "u-n4dei*~Articles'"2026 and 227
of the Constitution ottdtlndtia ip;'ay'i.n'gAA0'to quash the finai
endorsement dated 2O.I.2.2O£)45   the Assistant
Revenue Officer. BB?v1F'v..:'Banaswadv_iAS1ib~[)ivision. Ward
No.8, Dispen.sa1:y"_'Roa§d. EiangalVot"ef=:V 1 {tide A1'1I1€XL1I'€"G and
etc.,   _. ,1  . 

 :'PIisa..P,3T14'1'§A:oN"eoMING"'ot\i FOR PRLHEARING IN B'
GROUP THIS' :)A.Y;=51"H«E COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
'<V0N§kDER

 0 Petitioflefs representation for issue of a Katha of a

 'ee0i'tatI1VAeitni';=zoVable property which stood in the name of

  on his death, in the name of his mother

in.""the:'.reeords of the erstwhile HA. Sanitary Board,

  Afiangatore. since taken over by the respondent --~ BBMP.

ewhflen considered, was responded to by endorsement

‘dated 20-12-2004 Annexure-“Cf calling upon the

git

” orespoindelftt.

” Vaoczordingly disposed of.

petitioner to furnish the sketch plan and

heats *4′ i.

document of title,Lhas presented this wri_t…pejtitVioVn’. _

2. Learned counsel for the 7

submits that if the petiti~€J:l:f1″G;’ Were. ‘E0: the”

original title deed petiti’011e’r’s father
obtained title to the question. the
authorities application
for J orders thereon. in
oounsei for the petitioner
subrnliis: that three weeks’ time. petitioner

would Lma1§.e.:la’vVavilablelthe original title deeds to the 2″”

A Reeording the subrnission, nothing further

suniives for consideration in this petition and is

salad
‘gudgg

KS