MOOLENDRA KUMAR GANDHI, SRI. JINENDRA KUMAR GANDHI, SMT. URMILA KUMARI GANDHI AND SMT. BABY KUMAR GANDHI Vs. COMMISSIONER BRUHAT BANGALORE AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER H.N. Nagamohan Das 1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 29.11.2010 - Annexure L passed by the Assistant Revenue Officer of respondent No. 1 -Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (for short 'the BBMP'). The subject matter of this writ petition is property bearing Corporation No. 327 (sub numbered as 327, 327/3, 327/4, 327/5 and 327/6) situated at Mysore Road, Bangalore city. Petitioners contend that they purchased the property in question from one Smt. Narayanamma -respondent No. 2 herein under two different sale deeds dated 13.05.1986. The applications filed by the petitioners for transfer of khatha of the property in question to their names came to be rejected by respondent No. 1 under an endorsement dated 10.03.1992 on the ground that Smt. Narayanamma objected inter alia contending that the suit filed by her against the petitioners in O.S. No. 986/1987 is pending adjudication. Thereafter the petitioners filed O.S. Nos. 9077/1996 and 9078/1996 for declaration of title and for recovery of possession.

(2.) WHEN the matter stood at that stage the petitioners approached this Court in W.P. No. 19205/1992 to quash the endorsement issued by respondent No. 1 dated 10.03.1992 refusing to transfer the khatha. This Court vide order dated 05.11.1998 rejected the writ petition with an observation as under:

(3.) AGAIN the petitioners approached respondent No. 1 -BBMP to transfer the khatha of the property in question in their favour. Since respondent No. 1 failed to react to the request of the petitioners they approached this Court in W.P. No. 2107/2009 and the same came to be disposed vide order dated 04.10.2010 with an observation as under: 9. An objector filing an application, disputing the identity of the property should not come in the way of the respondent No. 1 considering the case of the petitioners for change of khatha in their favour. Khatha is only a fiscal entry; it only enables a party to pay the tax. Even assuming that there is some dispute regarding the identity of the property, it is for the Execution Court to adjudicate the matter. 10. The petitioners and the contesting respondents are directed to appear before the concerned Officer of the respondent No 1 (Assistant Revenue Officer, Chandra layout range) at 10.30 a.m. on 23.10.2010 without waiting for any notice from the said Assistant Revenue Officer. On considering the view -points to be put across by the rival parties and acting in the letter and spirit of the judicial pronouncements to which a reference is made hereinabove, the Assistant Revenue Officer shall take a decision in the matter in accordance with law within six weeks from 13.10.2010.