NIRMALA Vs. BENGALOORU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner's vendor-in-title by name Sri O.J. Varghese, a successful bidder in an auction of a corner site bearing No. 5DM 302 on 12.11.1991 held by the Bangalore Development Authority, led to issue of a Possession Certificate Annexure-'B' followed by the execution and registration of a Conveyance Deed dated 15.9.1995 Annexure-'C'. Petitioner's vendor made a representation dated 28.8.1998 to allot marginal land measuring 360 sq. ft. located adjacent and on the eastern side of the said site. According to the petitioner, in identical circumstances, when a writ petition was filed by one L. Anantharamaiah, owner of site bearing No. 5DM 308, the BDA allotted marginal land on 02.05.2003. So also, it is said, in the case of Sri B. Ramesh, owner of site bearing No. 5DM 306 was also a beneficiary of such allotment by the BDA on 8.10.2004. Petitioner is said to have made a representation dated 24.11.2004 to allot the marginal land measuring 360 sq. ft. which was responded to by endorsement dated 12.10.2011 Annexure-'T' stating that the marginal land is allotted to the 3rd respondent on 2.2.2011. Petitioner having instituted CCC No. 1861/2011 (civil), the Division Bench by order dated 14.10.2011 reserved liberty to the petitioner to challenge the endorsement dated 12.10.2011 and disposed of the said petition. Hence, this petition. Petition is opposed by filing statement of objections dated 29.1.2013 of the respondent-Bangalore Development Authority inter alia contending that the petitioner has no legal right to seek allotment of an independent site, in the guise of claiming it as a marginal land, since that property is not a marginal land but an independent site, which is allotted to the 3rd respondent. In addition, it is stated that the site allotted to the 3rd respondent is an intermediary site situated between site No. 6M 301 and 5DM 302 and numbered as site No. 3C 501. The formation of the intermediary site, it is stated, is incorporated in the original layout plan and also in the guideline survey sketch during the year 2007. It is lastly slated that there is no law relating to allotment of marginal land. It is alleged that petitioner an encroacher of BDA land having approached the Court with unclean hands, is not entitled to the extraordinary reliefs.

(2.) Respondent-Bda has filed additional statement of objections dated 1.2.2013 interalia reiterating the averments in the statement of objections and in addition that the 3rd respondent was allotted site No. 429 measuring 30 x 40 ft. at J.P. Nagar, 9th stage, II Block on 19.1.1995, which was withdrawn as the dimension of the said site was bigger and was allotted site No. 299 at J.B. Kaval on 7.8.1996 which was under litigation and therefore, an alternate site bearing No. 164, J.P. Nagar, 9th stage, II Block was allotted on 24.10.2002 and a Sale Deed executed on 13.11.2006, which too was cancelled due to pendency of litigation and thereafter, site No. 4M-5 13/A in HRBR layout, II block was allotted as an alternate site on 14.8.2007, which too was cancelled as it was carved from out of a corner site and therefore, the 3rd respondent was allotted the site in question at HRBR Layout, II Block. A photocopy of a page, out of some unknown register, is enclosed to the additional statement of objections, which states that in HRBR, II Block layout, a stray site is assigned No. 3C-501 on the basis of somebody's decision dated 26.9.2007 and is incorporated in the guideline survey map No. 13. In addition, a portion of the guideline survey map of the Bangalore Development Authority is also enclosed and site No. 3C-501 is shown to lie in between site No. 5DM 302 and 6M 301.

(3.) The 3rd respondent though served is absent and unrepresented.