NAVEEN Vs. CITY MUNCIPAL CORPORATION BELAGAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two petitions are filed by the joint family members feeling aggrieved by the highhandedness of respondent No.1/Corporation in utilizing the private property for formation of the road.

(2.) The petitioners in these two petitions claim that they are joint owners of property bearing CTS No.2791, along with one Balasaheb Patil. The grievance of petitioners before this Court is that respondent No.1/Corporation without following any Rules and Regulations highhandedly started forming a road. This compelled the petitioners to approach the Civil Court by filing an injunction Suit in O.S.No.383/2010. The petitioners claim inspite of there being a temporary injunction, respondent No.1 went ahead with the formation of road and utilized the land owned by the petitioners.

(3.) Present petitioners ancestors along with Balasaheb Patil filed three separate writ petitions seeking writ of mandamus to respondent No.1-corporation to acquire land and pay compensation. The learned single Judge rejected all the three writ petitions. It is only Balasaheb Patil who preferred writ appeal in W.A.No.6132/2011. The Division Bench of this court negatived the contention raised by the corporation, allowed the writ appeal and directed respondent No.1- corporation to initiate acquisition proceedings and complete within six months including payment of compensation. Unfortunately, the writ appeal was filed only Balasaheb Patil. The petitioners ancestors did not choose to assail the order of the learned single Judge.