Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 421 (KAR)

SREEKALA v. THE COMMISSIONER, BRUHA TH BANGALORE MAHANAGARA P ALIKE, BAN GALORE

2010-03-31

A.S.BOPANNA

body2010
ORDER Sri G.S. Naveen, learned Counsel has entered appearance for the third respondent. Hence, service is complete. The petition is taken up for consideration and disposed of with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. 2. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of mandamus to the respondents to consider her representation dated 18-2-2009 seeking transfer of katha. The said representation is produced at Annexure-A to the petition. 3. The petitioner contends that her mother was the absolute owner of the property in question and has executed a Will dated 10-6-2001 in her favour. After her demise, for immediate convenience, the katha was transferred to the name of the third respondent viz., the father of the petitioner. However, in view of the execution of the Will and bequeath made in favour of the petitioner, she is entitled to succeed to the property. The petitioner further contends that she is the only child and as such the third respondent herein who is her father has no objection for acting upon the Will and change of katha. In this regard, the affidavit sworn to by the third respondent is produced at Annexure-J to the petition. 4. In the light of the above, at the first instance, this Court had directed the petitioner to im-plead her father as the third respondent to this petition. Subsequently, notice has been issued and the third respondent is represented by his learned Counsel who states that the third respondent has no objection for change of katha to the name of the petitioner. These developments would indicate that there is no challenge to the Will as executed by the mother of the petitioner and more particularly, since the third respondent is not laying any claim to the property, the respondent 2 is required to act upon the request made by the petitioner subject to the petitioner complying with all other statutory requirements for the purpose of seeking of change of katha. Hence, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider the representation dated 18-2-2009 and act upon the same keeping in view the documents produced by the petitioner. Such compliance shall be done by the second respondent as expeditiously as possible but not later than four weeks from the date on which the certified copy of this order is furnished to the second respondent. Such compliance shall be done by the second respondent as expeditiously as possible but not later than four weeks from the date on which the certified copy of this order is furnished to the second respondent. In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs.