IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 157 DAY OF OCTOBER 2010
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.J.S.KHEHAR, CHIEF _
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.J{}STICE:'»l4\/IAi'€.lUi;A_hCHEl;L:UR"*
WRIT PETITION No.8°2O_i._~/V.20if)fOIx{LR~31'il:1§3»:;'5Es'»IIIv{{]<:3
BETWEEN:
1.
Muniyappa
S/0.l\/iuniveerappa
Aged about 34 ,YeaIis' A
Residing at T«1Q,96/ _
Bhoganahalli iyilflage
Varthur" A
Bangalc---r_e " EasIfi.;T:aliI.k;---
. RarIi€Sh.'_ A O
S / 0.lat.e Venkatesli. A
Aged ab0ut"28 years' ' "
R] O'. B.hogaiIa_h'alli Village
V_E'3iriL:,h.1l1'VvI.I~"10bli eeeee ~ *
A O ' v.Ban_galo1jé «East Taluk.
' S/0.1ateiMunishami
Aged'--Vaboiit 35 years
R/0.,» Bhoganah alli Village
Varthur Hobli
v Bangalore East Taluk.
Abbaiah
S/o.late Chikkappaiah
Aged about 40 years
R/o.Bhoganaha11i Village
Varthur I-Iobli
Bangalore East taluk.
PETITIONERS'--,g
[By Sri B.K.Chandrashekar, Adv. for M/ "
Associates) _. * .
AND: A' '
1. State of Kamataka ;
Rep. by it's Revenue Secretary'
IVI.S.Building _
Dr.B.R.An1bedka.r Road" _ '
K.R.Circle it
Bangalore 560 001,
2. The Special Deputy'--Comrnié3s,ion--ei'._ "
Bangalore Urban Dist'ri.(_;t "
Taluk Offiee'Compie§§' ' » ' V
K.G.RoaC1i" i 'B _ B
Bangalore' '
3. The Tahsii'darV_ _ . ;
Bangalore East'iTalt1k..n "
Banglaoife 560' ._036. " "
' _ 4. Lakshniinarayana
, ' . _.S,'o.'late Rarnaswamy
Aged. ,_abou_t 'years
._ "'.Res'idijn.g a:No.277
' __1VSi M_ain;_ SUI Cross
IDon'imali1r Layout
Bangalore 560 071. RESPONDENTS
v [By Sri Basavaraj Kareddy, Prl.GA for R1 to 3,
Sri Y.R.S}Iashiva Reddy, Adv. for R4,}
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and
-4 227 of the Constitution of India praying to set aside the
impugned order passed in respect of the land in
question by the R2 in case No.RRT(2) [E] CR 65/2008-
09 dated 4.12.2009 produced under Annexure--A.
T his Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary
Hearing this day, Chief Justice passed the fgllowing
order: 0'
ORDER
J.S.KHEHAR. C.J. (Oral):
Sri Y.R.Sadashiva Reddy, filevartned co{ins’ei_:
appearing for private respondent has, h_ai1de«d”vover to = 0′
us, in Court today, ‘an en.do:rsem_ent ‘iss1_1Aed,.:§ by the
Deputy COII1II1iSSi0n6I’} _I:)istrict dated
31112010 udmidgagfibaee has bani msued under
Sec.6’7 (2) ;of”t~heV-~Karn:a.t_aia:a Revenue Act, 1964.
The o’f–‘.the afore-stated endorsement has
also been The endorsement dated
31.3.2010xii’sdtaken iecord and marked as Ar1nexure-
” _Z IT,’-ng1.ish translated version as Annexure-Z–T.
“”wlWpéauon
V of the aforestated notice having been
issued in of the land which is subject matter of
V’-».consideration in the instant writ petition, learned
u”xco1_;nise1 for the respondent states, that the instant Writ
has been rendered infructuous.
3. A copy of Annexure-Z as also Anne:>s:ure~Z~’I’ is
handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioner,
who., acknowledges the factual position depicted..bly4:’_:th_e
learned counsel for the private respondent.
3. In View of the above, the;”ins’tant’wrii is”.
disposed of as having been rer1deret:1Ainfructu.(;u:s. °
ustice
Sk/~_ V _
Indegtr ‘yes/no . V