MANTRI TRANQUIL APARTMENTS Vs. BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in W.P.No.40299/2014 have challenged a notice bearing No.AEE/SDV/PR/268/2014- 2015 dtd. 30/7/2014 issued by the respondent No.2. They have sought for writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 not to interfere with the occupation of the members of the petitioner No.1 in the residential complex known as "Mantri Tranquil" built on property bearing Khata No.1208/7, 9 and 13 situated at Sy.Nos.7, 9 and 13 of Gubbalala Village, Uttrahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk. They have also sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 not to demolish the residential complex known as "Mantri Tranquil" built on property bearing Khata No.1208/7, 9 acres and 13 guntas situate in Sy.Nos.7, 9 and 13 of Gubbalala village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, or any portion thereof.

(2.) The petitioners in W.P.No.47937/2019 have sought for writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents not to transgress or trespass or to interfere in the rightful occupation and possession of the residents of the petitioner No.1 formed in the residential layout known as "Royal Palms Layout" situated at Sy.No.11 of Gubbalala village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk under the guise of restoring a storm water drain or under the guise of removal of encroachment over the storm water drain as per their representation dtd. 23/9/2019. They have also sought for writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the residential houses constructed in the residential layout known as "Royal Palms Layout" situated at Sy.No.11 of Gubbalala village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk.

(3.) The petitioners in W.P.No.40299/2014 contend that the petitioner No.2 proposed to develop land in Sy.Nos.7, 9 and 13 of Gubbalala Village, measuring 19 acres 30 guntas. The aforesaid land was already converted from agricultural to non-agricultural residential use in terms of orders dtd. 16/12/2004 and 31/3/2005. The property so converted was assessed to tax by the Panchayat and the name of the petitioner No.2 was included in the property records of the Panchayat. The lands fell within the limits of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (for short, 'BBMP') in the year 2007. The respondent No.1 entered the name of the petitioner No.2 in the property register in respect of the aforesaid properties and assigned Khata No.1208/7, 9 and 13. Petitioners claim that as per the Comprehensive Development Plan,1995 (for short, 'CDP,1995') the lands above mentioned lay within the residential zone and there was no mention of any storm water drain running through the aforesaid lands. The petitioner No.2 in order to construct a multi-dwelling residential apartment sought sanction of a building plan from the Bangalore Development Authority (for short, 'BDA') and also no objection certificates from the Pollution Control Board, BWSSGB, BESCOM, BSNL, Director General of Police, Airport Authority of India. Later, it sought approval of a building plan from the BDA to construct 05 residential buildings consisting of Ground plus 14 upper floors. The said plan was sanctioned on 21/8/2007 which was thereafter modified. The BDA also granted license for the construction and a commencement certificate authorizing the commencement of construction. Petitioners contend that after obtaining all the relevant permissions and sanctions from the concerned authorities, developmental activities in the aforesaid lands were taken up. The concerned authorities had also inspected the lands and were satisfied that petitioners had obtained all the required permissions and sanctions as stated above. Petitioners claim that after the construction was completed in all respects in accordance with the sanction plan, the BDA issued an occupancy certificate. It is claimed that the petitioner No.2 had sold the individual apartments to various purchasers, who all constituted as members of an apartment association as per the provisions of the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act and Rules, 1972. Petitioners claim that the petitioner No.2 had put up five buildings with eleven wings consisting of 1131 apartments, where all the apartments have been sold to third parties way back in the year 2009. Petitioners contend that after such registration, the owners of the apartments had applied to the BBMP for entering their names in the property register and that the same are pending.