BDA can evict illegal occupant from land acquired in 1961

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) will be finally able to evict an unauthorised occupant of land it had acquired in 1961.

The High Court set aside the order of a lower court which had decreed an order in favour of the occupant. One Venkataramanaiah claimed to have purchased a 30 ft x 60 ft site in Kempapura Agrahara, now known as Magadi Road – Chord Road Extension Layout (MC Layout) from one M Munivenkatappa in May 1964.

He claims to have built a house there and started living there in 1965. He claimed that the BDA had not issued any notification to him for acquiring the property and since he was in uninterrupted possession and enjoyment of the property he had perfected his title by adverse possession .

The trial court upheld his contention and decreed the order in his favour. This was challenged by the BDA in 2008 and Justice HT Narendra Prasad gave his judgement on the appeal recently.

The case of the BDA is that it had acquired the property which was part of 21 acres and 31 guntas in 1961 and formed a layout and allotted the site to one Thayamma.

In 1996, BDA and Shakunthala, daughter of Thayamma (who had since died) approached the Bangalore Metropolitan Task Force to demolish the building of Venkataramanaiah and restore the site to Shakunthala.

The BDA in its appeal before the HC contended that “The entire land was acquired in the year 1961 by issuing preliminary and final notifications, award as passed, possession of the entire land has been taken in the year 1964 and it was unitised for the formation of the layout. Since the plaintiff (Venkataramanaiah) claims to be the subsequent purchaser, the suit filed by the plaintiff is not maintainable.”

The High Court in its judgement cited earlier Supreme Court judgements, said that “once acquisition proceedings are completed, the purchaser who has purchased the land after acquisition has no right to maintain the suit against the BDA.”

Allowing the appeal by the BDA, the HC said, “Even in the written statement filed by the BDA, it is admitted that as on the date of the suit, the plaintiff is in possession of the property as unauthorised occupant. Therefore, under the circumstances, the defendants can evict the plaintiff only by following due process of law.”

RFA 23/2008