{"id":238638,"date":"2010-08-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010"},"modified":"2014-06-09T23:23:36","modified_gmt":"2014-06-09T17:53:36","slug":"sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: B.S.Patil<\/div>\n
RFA 2264\/ 2006\n1\n\nIN THFEZ HIG H COURT OF' KA.R.NA'I'A.K.A AT BANGALORE\nDA'I.'I?,D '1\"?--HS 'I'E\"\"iE 20\"\" DAY OF AUGUST. 2010\n\nIEBEZFO RE)\n\n*1':---133; 1\u00bb--ioN'i'3Li\u00ab: MR.JUS'3'ICI\u00a3 B.s.PA'I'11._  f  A' \n\nR.F.A.No.2264\/2006\n\nBETWEEN :\n\nSri ZAHIR A}--IIVEIZIJ 1\\\/IECCAL\n\nS\/0 late Nazeer Meccai.\n\nAged about 83 years.\n\nResiding at No.24,\n\nKadi1'e1'1.aha11i Villzige,\n\nU1.taraha.lli Hobli.   _ ._ {j V   'A _\n\nBangalore South 'I'a11L1k.  A     :f'sPPELLANT\n\n(By Sri S.Rai}.a1SficI:{\u00e911:;'};;55d\\.:_.._i;G:7_:V' 0 \nM\/  B1a,cI{ CO2}{.<s\u00bbvLaw;f'ir_i}i',\u00ab..Advs.)\nAND: V\n\nThe Ba11g.a101'\u20ac 0'Dc_\\?t':1Qf:n1\u00e9vz1i0Oiiuthority.\n\n__Se}11key_\u00a7_R021d, KL11'i.m_1ja Park 'West.\nA" Bemga.l._<i1'e2:560. Q20,  """ \n._qRe,pi*::_sent'ue.d&.i).y its Commissioner.  RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
[Si 1′. , Adv.)<\/p>\n
=%=*=\u00a7=<\/p>\n
 .0 _T’11is=RE2g.:{i1i211- E'<'irsi:. Apperz-11 is filed under Sc<*\u00a3.ior2 96 of CPC<\/p>\n
.0  aig_.$x.gA1ivn\u00a7i0"A_'t}1e _judgmer1i'. and de(:1'ee dated 1.7.2005 passed in
\n __"O.S0'.21.89\/I989 on the file of the 3 Add].CiI':y Civil and S\u20acSsi0ns<\/p>\n
~_ I:322u'1gz1l01'e 2-1.1'1d etc.<\/p>\n
RFA 2264 \/ 2006
\n2<\/span>
\nThis 21m)(:e’~11 coining on for Orders this day. the Court’<\/p>\n
niacie the following:\n<\/p>\n
j I UDGMENT<\/p>\n
1.. This appeal} is fi1c’~:d C1121i1.e11g,ir1g the jL\u00a3dg1’I1(*.I’1I”\u00a311Tid…dC\u20ac1l'{‘,\u00e9j” <\/p>\n
dated 01.07.2005 passed in O.S.N0.2’1’89–;’,1989.  <\/p>\n
agg1’ie\\xeci by the d1’smissa1 of his s11it.a’\ufb011e”:1 zS63\u20ac31{>i.3{?.g. ‘pei1I1i’a.;\ufb01i?1ii.’._<\/p>\n
i’nju1’1Ci’1’0n E’Lg’c’1i1’1S1′ ciefend211″1’L–1*es;.:–Qiidc11i. V’<\/p>\n
2. For me sake of c:0n\\{9;i:1.ie11(\u00e9c?.”i’1I(:._:p21i*’i:i._es wi1.1bt’- referred in<\/p>\n
by the mnks assigned to t.he’rV11;_i’n  f1″1’ia11″Ci.:.1.1i'”\u00a3.<\/p>\n
3. ‘1’1’1&\u00a7’i(‘f’2:1’\u00e9;1V(?”aiif1’I’ir3 \ufb01\u00a7i\u00e9ii1i’i’i.1ii;’i.s t1’1i.i’Vi”hVL: is the elbsoiute owner of<\/p>\n
plainii SC)h:\u00e9f\u00a7L1}\u20ac:3 :’C’,7′{1i?111. of one acre Comprised in
\nSy. No.24  Ui,t.a1.’ahaI1i Hobli, Bangalore
\nV Thfl>\u00a5:'(1fE1}~-~\u20acXE.(?I11 of {he Iand rnc~tas’:.1re$ 1.9 acres 34
\n  claims In have }3L1{‘Ch’c1S6d an extent 01′ 5
\ngi1r’1’11:”.i’\u00a7b’y   dz-iieci 16.10.1974 and a1.’1()1}f1er exieni. of 5<\/p>\n
g;i.1;’1t21s” by:’W.\\v\u00e91),’ of ‘c1I1(I)1I’1E3I’ sale Cleed de\ufb01ed 16.10.1984.<\/p>\n
 (.::(;1~J”1A1C’.:1iI’C1’E11g that he had put up dweiiiiig house in the said<\/p>\n
 ‘-}\ufb01i.3′()}.’1e1’i}.r by 0bi.21i1’1i1’1g perm1’ssi(.m \u00a3’1*0m the villagc ]3E11’1(.’.hE-ly\u00e9llh<\/p>\n
“~211’i(‘i” E’.I’i’c’:z1:. the ciefenclaiiiwi:3anga1(‘)re D\u20ac:’\\'(;’.10pI11\u20ac1’1E. ALi1h01’i1.y was<\/p>\n
  cii1:’2g to E.i’espz~.1ss in the suit pinperty and was t:1’yi1’1g {.0<\/p>\n
RFA 2264\/20{}6<\/p>\n
demolish the existing: stn.ict’.Lire. he approached the Court.
\nseeking a decrree for \u00a73@I’I11’c1I’If31’1i. injui1e1.i0n.<\/p>\n
‘4~<\/p>\n
4. I)f3f\u20ac11dE1Ili. 1″esist.ed the stiii. by filing writ.ter1 sji’fat,eI}ie:i:i’tj; <\/p>\n
ctomenciecl that Sy. No.24 had been i1\u20ac)\u00bbtit’ted  <\/p>\n
Authority for an improvement. scherneifor1’f0ri’hati01*t oi’ <\/p>\n
outer ring road start:ii1g from ‘h_i.’g;h. t’,i*e1iisI1’1issiO:j1 ‘i;::{)W.\u00a3:’,1f -hear 2 L<\/p>\n
Kanaliaptlm road and ‘i<3i11i1ig_____V'3\u00bb6  'cross ioetd in
\nBemashankari 2"" Stage and .33Qs\u00a31keji'ehai_ii~itO'Ba11gai0re~1\\\/Iys0i*e
\nRoad. It. was ecmiended i11?1{"\u00a7..h\u20ac~pVl"\u20ac'AIiIT1i'11\u00a7;1'yz'1\ufb01.O{i\ufb01catio\ufb02 in this<\/p>\n
i'egz,11'd was issi._ie–;i  _i.8,0'3. i976_4whiehVvif\u00e9is published in the<\/p>\n
If<tE1.].IriElE{Ci,\u00a7'{t:.,~:E Ga2:etti:-,_..ciatfed -I6:~O3.i9–89. They I"urt'her C()1";1,E?I'1dGd
\nthat notice V' or the' -.i;prOf;re_)_'s'e\u00abv:'1" acquisition was given as<\/p>\n
C0nt"e1i1p!at.ed  Se(\u00e9t.i.'0i1'"i7[5] of the BDA Act to the notified<\/p>\n
 I<'m.1th'ed\u00e91i's'*. aaiiyci <)'ie1'1e"1'-""'ini.e1-ested persons in the iand in<\/p>\n
c'1'u._e\u00e9\u00ab;Viso'ii;A itswzisa.et;;'it.en(iecl that the }E3}'.})A was taking acition to<\/p>\n
21(:quii7__e the Ea–i:'i'<:i and the 2.1eqr.,iisit':i0ri proceedings were in<\/p>\n
 ;:);tg)gi-ess."v 'I.'he ;:)121int.iI't'. it was urged. not being one of the<\/p>\n
 1{h"2it.'he\ufb01\u00a7';'1rs in respect. oi' the land in qL1est'.i<3n. held no right, to<\/p>\n
 liisie the suit.\n<\/p>\n
3  On the basis of the ri.\\-tat C0nt,enti0I1s, the Trial Court<\/p>\n
“aimed necessary issues as regards the proof of iawfui<\/p>\n
RFA 226-13 \/2006
\n4<\/span><\/p>\n
ossession of the .)Eaint.ii’.f over {he suit schedule )1’O)(3FiV and
\nP I l I ,
\nhis eni.i1,}emen1 for Jeniizment. ii’1’u1’1o1,ior: as souirhi. The
\n.3 .\n<\/p>\n
)l21i.nt.iff examined himself as PW~l and reduced and marked
\nE
\nEXS.P~l to \u00a31.14. No evidence was lei. in on behzzzli.o’r?,_i’Eove<\/p>\n
Clefendant”.\n<\/p>\n
6. The learned Trial Judge has h\u20acl_(,’1~1l’.1E.\u00a7t tl_1lef’ailed_V <\/p>\n
to establish his possession and was t:he1’e1’oi”Ve i*.1ot”*ent.iiulen(f}..&lkotf<\/p>\n
the decree of permanent injunetiori–~._and \u00e9iveeordir1gly{.dis.rnissed 2 L<\/p>\n
the suit. Aggrieved by the sz-rriie. tlfl\u00a7’:VVV1.’5\u00bb!f’t’\u00a33’\u20ac3_’I]l  is filed.\n<\/p>\n
7. Counsel for the appellarfii.   court below<\/p>\n
has totally.I’nisdivre’Cied._itse’l’i7._in” joroceeding on the basis of the<\/p>\n
ri1isubsi.ar1tialiedildvefexie\u00e9eeizilgeii by the defendant. regarding; the<\/p>\n
fc.1CC{L1iS.i*..\u00a73:01″1’A()l’ ihellp-:7ope1″i:y. His contention. is that the eritire<\/p>\n
‘exient.. of 1.._he.}e.r1tl,measured 19 acres 34 gunias and out of the<\/p>\n
seirlzier 1:-_1_reV\u00a7)l%1ivz.i1.iil’s claim related to only an extent of one acre<\/p>\n
V \u00ab.v11ach.'”I=;r2  “piirL?hasecl way back in the years 1974 <31 1984 by<\/p>\n
., xargiyr. elf iwo'"sepai*ate regisl.ere.d sale  Based on the sale<\/p>\n
_rleeds"'liis name W218 reeorclecl in the khmiha and in the RFC<\/p>\n
 ex~t:.rae.\u00a3s. which were produced before the Trial Court. I-Iowever,<\/p>\n
 ties}:)it,e the same. the 'E'rial Court. has proceeded to dismiss the<\/p>\n
suit. iiled on the g_.-_\u00a7rou1'1<;l that" since the land was acquired by the<\/p>\n
Ar'<\/p>\n
Rm 2264\/2006
\n5<\/span><\/p>\n
BDA and the iitle ol”1=l’1e plair1iii’i”was; ehallenged by the BDA,<\/p>\n
ihe plai1’1i.ii’i” was not e1’1iii.led for the relief.<\/p>\n
8. Having regard to the nature of defence lal’\u00a7\u00e9f’1′ ‘she<\/p>\n
defendan1’~BDA and in the lighi of the  mi”\n<\/p>\n
8.ddL1CI\u20acCl any evidence before the Trial Cogjrtj. “COl.’l’1’1S\u20ac’f*fO,i”lti\u00a2A’<\/p>\n
BDA was directed to secure the_nori\ufb01(:atiolns unrier xivhieh’. the <\/p>\n
portion of the land in Sy. No.24 ‘;1c.”:gu:l’s’;;ic}ln and
\naboui the sul3s6C1ueni dr;l”\u00ae1\u00a7JI)11fi’eil1l\u00abll” ihe said
\nacquisition. Mr. Puiie  appearing for
\nthe BDA has sceclaeicl   that though the
\nBDA failed to  the Trial Court. by
\nleading  Jl”21’et remains that the land in<\/p>\n
Sy. No.24 wa}:-.._41io,1ii’ieci for .\u00a71″(_f’qLI\u00a7Sili()I1 as per the preliminary<\/p>\n
4…i.1oti.i’iLt22_4f.\u00a7i:olr1’~v:lai,eel ‘*–].8V.03&.Vl.976 published in the }{arna1t.aka<\/p>\n
A’C}a.:>:ei\u00abLe_V Cl\u00a7’tlO\u00a7i*.4vA.l\u20ac\\.D3.l989 followed by the final eleelaraiion<\/p>\n
 in the Karnatalia Gazette on<\/p>\n
V l0.08.l”990.V.:. ‘{3r)i.l1 i.l’1e.se 11ot.il”‘1eatio1’1s are placed before the<\/p>\n
K V’ W lCo1.1ri,eal()1ig’with a memo.\n<\/p>\n
  Itis seen from the final no1.ifieation issued under S\u20acC'{‘.iOI’l<\/p>\n
–\u00ab..ji9{‘.i”] oi” the BDA Act’ $979. that an extent of 12 gumas of land<\/p>\n
  1’ised in Sy. No.24 has been aoquiied for the purpose of<\/p>\n
RFA 12264\/2(){}6
\n7<\/span><\/p>\n
but no iiiaiteriais were produced to show that any c(mstruet.i0r1<\/p>\n
was put up in the suit property and his bare assertion tlmt: he<\/p>\n
was residing in the suit schedule property <\/p>\n
believed. ‘I’he1″ef01’e. he was not entitled for ‘the .1e.iief’d (riff V’<\/p>\n
perI1’1a11er11 ir1junct;i(m.\n<\/p>\n
1.0. The plairitiff produced E’.\\\u00abVO:S\u00a31f\u20ac  as  <\/p>\n
He has also Produced Exs.I-3-5 ‘t’or\u00bb.V”‘r”:9 wh’in:’.V11*- “INC and
\nn1ut.ati011 extra(:l.s. The ‘F:”iai Coas\ufb01tf ‘1’e;C:01’uC}s_ a fiIidii’1g’V that the
\nname of the petitioner is erit:ere_d iidi—ihe 1<_3.r&12i'1-*.':f\u00a5_1a npertaining to the<\/p>\n
land in quesiioii _ai1d 't'._11al':\u00a7:he dad-.;j'i'*'Qd.ticed:'the land revenue<\/p>\n
receipts.    persuaded itself 1:0 dismiss the
\nsuit'. on tiliedhglsis 0'i'.Vt.I;1',e{'deihriee'Of the BDA that the land was<\/p>\n
n0t,ii'ied f:)I" e1Ltcp;iis_tl.icmT'a1id see()i1(;1ly on the ground that in the<\/p>\n
 re'e–r)rd"'s-.df i..Ai'i;;h–i1;'; pi'0CHi'(fed. 110 dwelling house was found<\/p>\n
11iCi1tio_1i\u00e9:{1:"'4,_'I'i*ie~Tl'i'i.21l Court is carried away by the fact 11113.1'<\/p>\n
 si1ie.e't..E_fie pig}i.1'ii:ifi"'f'21i}eci to produce any material to show that. he<\/p>\n
 put up .\u00e9;i'iy cronstructioii 01:1 the kind in question and faikecl<\/p>\n
 \u00ab._t.(*r.eve11 p'r'odL1(:{% any photogrziphs or to take out ctomrnission. for<\/p>\n
  %inspeet'i0i'1 arid establish the exi.st.e1:1ce of S1I'1ICE.L1I'\u20ac in the<\/p>\n
_  he was not emitlecl for grarai. of pe1*1'1ia1'ie1it. iiijunct\ufb02ioii.<\/p>\n
RFA 2254\/:2()<}s
\n8<\/span><\/p>\n
11.. As atlrezidy iioticed ai:)ove. the approach of the Trio! Court.
\n totally e1’1′()r1oous. in ihz1i’. the d\u20acf<.'.1"1d'dIH' has not eiitomd the
\nwitness box and has 1101'. prociuced any material to show,'tha1'.<\/p>\n
the suit schedule land was acquired. Though in thrs\ufb01 "'w_i'_'i-1_i'.\u00e9\u00bb:;1<\/p>\n
S'{Ei'\u00a7t?1'1'1t?1'1i. ii' is (\u00e9c)11t.endod that. 21 p1'(;'li1}1il'1E}1"y 1'}0E'ii?i:\u20acEiY,_iA()u1I:"V\ufb012i\u00a7s'-,<\/p>\n
published notifying the lalid for E1Cq.1.li$i1iO1'1'H.ii'1;\u00a3'C1–._':{}1.C' EiE}id_<\/p>\n
p1'eli1'm'na1'y Iiotificafion is siateci lo i'ra\\–.ie i:{(\u00a7ei"\u00a3 pi"ib1ishcdVV1.15"-.(ihbi_:<\/p>\n
ga7:e[t".d’u.i\u20ac~i;ji’opei”1.y measuring<\/p>\n
one acre (iwn-ed \\Ai’3.s’vV:i–o’i\u00a7.ii’ied for acquisition. in
\n(“he zxlaseiioo  “iii ihis i’ega1’d. there was no
\njusLifi<:ai.ion V:9i..1.ions 21Cq1.:i1’i1’ig the Ialici. T116 final I}()'[i\ufb01(.’E:li.i()1′] p1′()c1’L1Ced<\/p>\n
_ \u00e9i’s;. 1’ei}+:%1*1*ec1 to hereiii eiiiaove. ciisclosos that”. only mi ex1.e1’1i. of 12<\/p>\n
 of land in -Sy. No.24  z:1\u20ac:qi:i1’ed by the fiiial dc(:iara1.io1a<\/p>\n
RI-‘A 2264\/20()\u00a3S
\n9<\/span>
\npublished under Section 19(1) of the BDA Acid in the K8l’}’1E1l’c1kE,1<\/p>\n
Gazette on 10.08.1990. Tl’1ei’el’ore, it. is clear mat the Trial<\/p>\n
Court. has blindly proo\ufb01ecled to dismiss the suit without lfiiidiiig<\/p>\n
0:11 What was the extzeilt. 0!’ land notified for \u00a31{‘.QLiiS_i.l..i.Qi1iii-.’\u00a7ll\u20ac_
\npi’elim1’na1’y noti.I’i.cati(m; whci,l”le1′ the extent. no’i’il:iedfiri’ t,l’1e..l ‘
\npreliminary nolificziiion was the l2ii’id””a\u00a7:q.ui1i;edVl”by’ “i’ii1al”1<\/p>\n
11oI’.ii’iCa1.io1’1; and wl’1elh<:r the smii. sc':l1ecVi:,1_l\u00e9'–1arid xxrieivss pa,1'~i of lt'l~icl*<\/p>\n
land notified for 'c1(.'(}L1iSi{.i0i}. In t'l1_\u00e9'\u00a3Lbse11c1e ol'..lii';dili2Vglsl"oii all
\nthese aspects. the conclusion I'\u20ac21Ql'"i"\u20acCi  {ha Trial Ciou\ufb02 CE1I11'10l'L<\/p>\n
be ziccepied.\n<\/p>\n
13. Siiicy\u00e9 1’1. \\if\u00e9isvl’._oi1lyA3i2; sr.iif.~\u00ab.l_’oi’_b_*a_re injurictiiori based on title
\nand as i.h.eA’plai’11lii’l’lj\u00e9islfp1’Vo’dili’t1;\u00e9d his title deeds; coupled wiih<\/p>\n
thee RTC_:–1nd Miiiaiion7’exi:i:’ac.l.s. the Court. below ought to have<\/p>\n
 e\u00a7~ia.n’1i1’ied the ii’1;ii’.t’ei’ tailii\ufb01g note of the docrumentaiy ccvideiioe.<\/p>\n
Tl*is_’:_ l_1:’E1\u00bb~’\u00a3flI’1{:”–l_\u00a31!!l:\u20aci 2-1 claim to the land in quesuon on the<\/p>\n
 gi”()U1:1L1._mll1E1l’.ill:li\ufb01if-Q been not.il”ied for acquisitlion. ought to have
\n:,.\u00abpi'<::di.1(\u00e9ecl i'cl\u00e9-veiiit. docuiiicnis to prove t.l121l. the land in C}U\u20acS'l.i()l"1
\n  noi.iI'ied dl'C',E.l that  E1CQE.li1'E'.Cl for f()1'E]'1\u00a3-1l'iOI1 of ring
\n  The \u20acibS<;'.1"i('.('. of l.hese 1'clevam n'iat'(:i'ials has resulted in<\/p>\n
,  j1,id.gi11em passed lay l:l'1e Trial Court, which does \u00a3101, address<\/p>\n
(3 Iiizlizi g.__;i'ie\\=*ai1("<: of llht' plz\u00a2i.i;':i.il"l'. MI'. l.5'iiti'e Gowda-1 Sl1bl'1'1li.S<\/p>\n
RI-'A 2254\/2()cs
\n1 O<\/p>\n
that since a portion 0:’ Eand Comprised in 83\/. No.24 is acquired
\nfor pubiic purpose and has been already utilized, BDA may be
\ngiven an lopp0rit.1i’1it:y to place on record the relevant’ docunrierits
\nshowing as to what. is the portion that is actually reqt:~1_r:c–d:”L:ari’d’
\nwiietiier the suit property is pa-11*t oi’ the property ‘T<\/p>\n
can oniy be done before the Trial C()i,1I’1.;'”S.1,1ffi(‘)\u20ac? for  piiifpose<\/p>\n
of this case. to observe that the jucfgnient  det.~i’ee.;$a1ss\u00bbe\u00a7tl.\u00a75j;*.:<\/p>\n
the Tris} Court eaniiot be sttstaiiiezi arid”-tghe. i11at’terV”re.qLiires
\nfresh eonsideraiion.\n<\/p>\n
14. I-Ienee, this appeal  judgment.\n<\/p>\n
and decree of tf1’1e_~vV’ifi’i’ali C}t5″t~;ift’.  set aside. The matter is<\/p>\n
remanded “:96 _fresh C(:n1li’s.iderati0i1 after providing fresh<\/p>\n
t)p};)ortt1;ii?y_ to .lbe,th*t:l’1el’pari.ies. It is made clear that the<\/p>\n
 deieiid’aIit.–T5’DA..shaII 15;-%”‘g1ven an opportunity to lead evidence<\/p>\n
ini–.stli.n.pet1’i_:Vt;f’ its “del5e11t\u00e9e and the Trial Court shall c:onsi.de1′ all<\/p>\n
 the deetlment_sf..pr0duced by the piaintiff before recording any<\/p>\n
i’ fiiiciing 0n,t_}ie COI1’i.(‘ir1i.iOL}S issues.<\/p>\n
safi
\nl\ufb01\u00e9qe<\/p>\n
V ” KK<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010 Author: B.S.Patil RFA 2264\/ 2006 1 IN THFEZ HIG H COURT OF’ KA.R.NA’I’A.K.A AT BANGALORE DA’I.’I?,D ‘1″?–HS ‘I’E””iE 20″” DAY OF AUGUST. 2010 IEBEZFO RE) *1′:—133; 1\u00bb–ioN’i’3Li\u00ab: MR.JUS’3’ICI\u00a3 B.s.PA’I’11._ f A’ R.F.A.No.2264\/2006 BETWEEN : Sri ZAHIR […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-238638","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late ... vs The Bangalore Development ... on 20 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late ... vs The Bangalore Development ... on 20 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-09T17:53:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\\\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-09T17:53:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2353,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\\\/O Late ... vs The Bangalore Development ... on 20 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-09T17:53:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\\\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late ... vs The Bangalore Development ... on 20 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late ... vs The Bangalore Development ... on 20 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-09T17:53:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-09T17:53:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010"},"wordCount":2353,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010","name":"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late ... vs The Bangalore Development ... on 20 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-09T17:53:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-zahir-ahmed-meccai-so-late-vs-the-bangalore-development-on-20-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Zahir Ahmed Meccai S\/O Late … vs The Bangalore Development … on 20 August, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238638","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=238638"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238638\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=238638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=238638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=238638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}