J. S. AUGUSTIN REDDY Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved of the inaction on the part of the respondent-Assistant Revenue Officer, Marutisevanagara Sub-Division, Ward No.59, Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP), Bengaluru, in restoring the name of the petitioner in the khatha in respect of the immovable property bearing old No.9/14, new No.34, Lloyd's Road, Marutisevanagara, Bengaluru.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the khatha in respect of the property in question was standing in the name of the petitioner in the records of the BBMP. However, on the strength of a probate issued by the VI Additional City Civil Judge in P & SC No.34/2004, dtd. 2/8/2005, respondents No.3 and 4 herein got the name of the petitioner removed from the khatha register and their names were entered in the khatha register. However, the petitioner herein filed a miscellaneous petition in Misc.No.433/2008 before the same court, which had issued the probate earlier in favour of respondents No.3 and 4. The said court, by order dtd. 10/6/2020, allowed the miscellaneous petition, recalled the order dtd. 2/8/2005 passed in P & SC No.34/2004 and revoked the probate issued in favour of respondents No.3 and 4. The said respondents were also directed to deliver the probate to the court, forthwith.

(3.) Thereafter, respondents No.3 and 4 approached this Court in M.F.A.No.1880/2021. However, for non- compliance of office objections, the appeal was dismissed by order dtd. 6/12/2022. Thereafter, I.As.No.1/2023 and 2/2023 were filed by the appellants to recall the order dtd. 6/12/2022, while condoning the delay. However, both the applications came to be dismissed by order dtd. 13/6/2023. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would therefore submit that the petitioner is entitled to have his name restored in the khatha register.