B.M. SUBRAMANI Vs. THE COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER purchased the immovable property in question being a vacant site, under a sale deed dated 25.3.2011 Annexure -D for a valuable consideration, from his vendor in title, by name, Shyamala, who on an application to the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, for short 'BBMP', had her name recorded in the property register declaring the property in question to be a vacant site without a building thereon, the extract of which is Annexure -E as on 24.3.2011 i.e., immediately preceding the sale deed Annexure -D. Petitioner did not apply for change of entry in the property register, to record his name and therefore 'BBMP' was not aware of the purchase of the property by the petitioner. However, since the name of the petitioner's vendor was found in the property register and having noticed a massive unauthorized construction put up on the site in question, issued notices u/s. 321[1], [2] and [3], 300 and 308 of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976, for short 'Act', Annexures -A, B, C & J, alleging that said Shyamala had put up construction of ground plus four floors on the vacant site without prior permission or sanction of building plans. Hence this petition.

(2.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner who submits that petitioner is a law abiding citizen and that he utilized the building plan Annexure -G said to be approved by the City Municipal Council, K.R. Puram, on 22.7.2004, in the name of the petitioner's vendor in title.

(3.) IN the light of the aforesaid statutory provisions, the sanction/permission accorded to the building plan on 22.7.2004 by the City Municipal Council, could not have been put into force for construction of the building during the year 2012 without prior permission on a fresh application. Even otherwise, by 25.3.2011, the construction was not put up on the site in question and as on that day too, sanction/permission Dt. 22.7.04 had come to an end on the expiry of one year there from.. Yet again, the immovable property in question having fallen within the territorial jurisdiction of 'BBMP' the name of petitioner's vendor in title was registered in the assessment register for payment of tax over vacant site.