HASEENA KAUSER Vs. BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of writ court with the following prayer:

(2.) Learned Panel Counsel appearing for the respondent-BDA opposes the petition making submission in justification of the acquisition. He has also filed Statement of Objections resisting the writ petition . The Panel counsel submits that the right to lay a challenge does not avail to the person who has bought the property post acquisition and therefore no relief can be granted to the petitioner. He also points out that the compensation in respect of subject property is deposited in City Civil Court vide letter dtd. 25/11/2009 (Annexure-R7) and therefore petitioner be relegated thereto.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is broadly in agreement with the submission made by BDA Panel Counsel to the extent that right to challenge the acquisition does not avail to the subsequent buyer of the property; however this does not mean that such a person cannot take the compensation payable for the subject property when that is not released in favour of the notified khatedars from whom he has bought the subject property. Right to challenge acquisition is one thing and the right to receive compensation, is another. The later cannot be denied to the bonafide transferee for consideration. In view of the above, this writ petition succeeds in part. Petitioner is entitled to seek release of the amount deposited in the City Civil Court to the extent of his interest in the acquired property. If an appropriate application is made, the learned Judge of the City Civil Court shall try & dispose of the same within an outer limit of six months. All contentions are kept open. Now, no costs.