COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE Vs. FARAULLA KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr Yatindra Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, while assailing the judgment of the Division Bench of the Signature Not Verified Karnataka High Court dated 26 June 2019 dismissing Writ Appeal No 4393/2013, submits that a title suit (OS No 4413/2000) is presently pending between the petitioners and Lakshminarayana Charitable Trust, where the title to the suit property is under adjudication. The submission which has been urged is that pending the decision of the title suit, the High Court ought not to have issued a direction for mutation.

(2.) The High Court has clarified that the direction for mutation will be subject to the pursuit of any other remedy available under the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act 1956 and it is open to the Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike to establish its title by following due process of law. With the clarification which has been issued by the Division Bench of the High Court in the present petition, it is not necessary to entertain the Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. It is well settled that mutation entries do not by themselves confer title which has to be established independently in a declaratory suit.

(3.) We are also not inclined to accept the alternate submission of the learned senior counsel that this Court should injunct the respondents from creating third party interests. Any such application for interim relief would have to be addressed before the competent civil court where the proceedings are pending or which the petitioners may be advised to pursue.