Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Smt. Shanthamma and others, are legal heirs of late H.A. Veerabhadrappa. They filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, challenging an endorsement dated 12.07.2022 issued by the Assistant Revenue Officer, Banashankari Zone, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), the second respondent. The endorsement rejected their application for change of khata in respect of property bearing No.806, 16th Main, 19th Cross, Banashankari-II Stage, Bengaluru, solely on the ground that a civil suit (O.S. No. 100/2021) was pending in respect of the property. The petitioners claimed title through a registered Will dated 20.03.2006 executed by the original owner, and also relied on a legal heir certificate. They argued that the BBMP, being a revenue authority, cannot refuse khata transfer merely because a civil suit is pending, as khata is only a revenue record and does not confer title. The respondents, including the BBMP and the private respondent Smt. Sudha, who is the plaintiff in the civil suit, opposed the petition. The court, after hearing arguments, held that the BBMP's endorsement was unsustainable. The court observed that the BBMP, as an executive authority, cannot adjudicate title disputes and must not refuse khata transfer solely on the ground of pendency of a civil suit. The proper course is for the BBMP to consider the application on its merits based on the documents produced, without encroaching upon the jurisdiction of the civil court. The court quashed the impugned endorsement and directed the BBMP to consider the petitioners' application for khata change afresh, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, including the private respondent. The court clarified that the khata change would be subject to the outcome of the civil suit.
Headnote
A) Municipal Law - Khata Transfer - Pending Civil Suit - Section 114A of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 - The petitioners sought change of khata in their names based on a registered Will and legal heirship. The BBMP refused on the ground that a civil suit was pending regarding the property. The High Court held that the BBMP cannot refuse khata transfer solely on the ground of pendency of a civil suit, as the khata is a revenue record and the BBMP must consider the application on its own merits, without encroaching upon the jurisdiction of the civil court. The impugned endorsement was quashed and the BBMP was directed to consider the application afresh. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Jurisdiction of Civil Court vs. Executive Authority - The court observed that the BBMP, being an executive authority, cannot adjudicate title disputes and must not refuse khata transfer merely because a civil suit is pending. The proper course is to consider the application based on available documents and leave the parties to seek appropriate remedies before the civil court. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the BBMP can refuse to change khata in respect of a property solely on the ground that a civil suit is pending in respect of the property, without adjudicating the rights of the parties.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsement dated 12.07.2022 is quashed. The respondents No.1 and 2 are directed to consider the application filed by the petitioners for change of khata afresh, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, including the private respondent, and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The khata change shall be subject to the outcome of the civil suit.
Law Points
- Khata transfer cannot be denied solely on ground of pending civil suit
- BBMP must consider application on merits
- Section 114A of Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act
- 1976
- Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India
