TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (2) TMI 1097
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct) for formation of Gayatridevi Extension Layout and has been reserved as civic amenity site in the improvement scheme adopted under the said Act. The said Act was repealed by virtue of Section 76 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as BDA Act) and the scheme prepared under the repealed enactment is deemed to have been prepared under the new enactment. It is the further case of the petitioner that vast extents of land in Sy.No.2 of Rajamahal Village was acquired by the City Improvement Trust Board (CITB) i.e., the land measuring 18 acres 10 guntas was handed over by the father of the third respondent to the Junior Engineer, CITB, which is evident from the letter dated 22/23.8.1966. The C.A. site measuring 52x80 mtrs. forms an integral part of 18 acres 10 guntas of land described In the letter dated 22/23.8.1966. That the land was handed over to CITB and was acknowledged by a sketch drawn on 9.8.1965. In the comprehensive development plan of CITB the said C.A. site has been earmarked for a pubic park. When the matter stood thus, the second respondent issued a public notice on 22.3.1993 in Kannada daily newspaper "Prajavani" on 26.3.1993 stating....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t in order to assert its right, title and interest as well as possession insofar as the C.A. site is concerned. In the circumstances, he submits that the order impugned has to be set aside. 6. Per contra, learned senior counsel appearing for the first and second respondents has drawn my attention to Rule 11 of II Schedule pertaining to procedure for recovery of compensation under Sections 222 and 276 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to contend that the writ petition is not maintainable. That under sub-rule (6) of Rule 6, it is stated any person who is aggrieved by an order made under Rule 11 may institute a suit in a Civil Court to establish his right, which he claims to the property in dispute subject to the result of such suit. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner would have been well advised to file a civil suit rather than to file writ petition challenged by the second respondent. 7. In reply, counsel for the petitioner submits that having regard to the impugned order wherein categorical findings have been given against the petitioner even if any suit is filed by the petitioner before the competent Civil Court, it would be in a disadvantageous position having regard to the f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unity to the petitioners herein since it has asserted its right in respect of the C.A. site in question with supporting documents and the petitioner as well as the third respondent herein were heard in the matter. The first respondent after recording the factual matrix of the case has stated as follows: "Hence, after a careful examination of all the papers and arguments proposed by the Bangalore Development Authority, it. becomes I clear that at the macro level the CITB (BDA) took over almost all the portion of land in the Upper Palace Orchard and Lower Palace Orchard and in the process the CITE regarded every piece of land in that entire area has become the property under their control but at the macro level when all the papers have been examined, the proposition that the entire plot of land as part of the CITE proves otherwise as far as this one particular piece of land (about 1 acre is concerned). I have also somewhere come across papers suggesting that the Pump House area and the surrounding portion of land have been all along kept with the Maharaja for the obvious reason and the surrounding area of the Pump House occupied by the Chowkidars and the workers were left out in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of the claim or objection, upon such terms as to security or otherwise as the Tax Recovery Officer shall deem fit. (3) The claimant or objector must adduce evidence to show that- (a) (in the case of immovable property) at the date of the service of the notice issued under this Schedule to pay the arrears, or (b) (in the case of movable property) at the date of the attachment he had some interest in, or was possessed of, the property in question. (4) Wherein, upon the said investigation, the Tax Recovery Officer is satisfied that, for the reason stated in the claim or objection, such property was not, at the said date, in the possession of the defaulted or of some person in trust for him or in the occupancy of a tenant or other person paying rent to him, or that, being in the possession of the defaulter at the said date, it was also in his possession, not on his own account or as his own property, but on account of or in trust for some other person, or partly on his own account and partly on account of some other person, the Tax Recovery Officer shall make an order releasing the property, wholly or to such extent as he thinks fit, from attachment or sale. (5) Wh....