SHRIDEVI AND ANR. versus MURALIDHAR AND ANR.

SHRIDEVI AND ANR. versus MURALIDHAR AND ANR.

Prima facie, Site Nos. 433, 434, and 435 were not acquired by the Bangalore Development Authority; High Court was right in holding that an arguable case exists for injunction, Trial Court failed to consider the crucial question of acquisition and misdirected itself, its omission warranted interference.

Parties
Appellant: Shridevi; Respondent: Muralidhar; Respondent: Leela Prabhakar Rao; Respondent: Bangalore Development Authority
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal (after High Court Appellate Process)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; High Court's order made absolute.
Legal Topics
Temporary Injunction, Land Title, Acquisition Proceedings, Practice and Procedure
Property Law Land Acquisition Temporary Injunction Land Title Acquisition Proceedings Practice and Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shridevi

Appellant

Muralidhar

Respondent

Leela Prabhakar Rao

Respondent

Bangalore Development Authority

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal (after High Court Appellate Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Site Nos. 433, 434, and 435 in Survey No. 15/1 were acquired by Bangalore Development Authority
  2. 2 Entitlement to temporary injunction restraining construction and use of borewell on Site No. 433

Ratio Decidendi

Prima facie, Site Nos. 433, 434, and 435 were not acquired by the Bangalore Development Authority; High Court was right in holding that an arguable case exists for injunction, Trial Court failed to consider the crucial question of acquisition and misdirected itself, its omission warranted interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; High Court's order made absolute.

Orders

  • Order of Division Bench of Supreme Court dated 21.06.2007 (recalling construction permission) made absolute.
  • Plaintiff-Respondent No. 1 to furnish security of Rs. 2,00,000 within four weeks; in event suit is dismissed and appellants prove damages for not being able to raise construction, compensation may be awarded.