Banashankari Temple’s claim over site gets a boost

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: The claim of the Sree Banashankari Temple, Bengaluru, over a site next to it got a boost with the High Court of Karnataka allowing it to present new evidence before the Trial Court.

The Temple had approached the High Court in 2004 with an appeal against one PG Dharmaiah, who claimed to be the owner of the site granted to him under the Ashraya Scheme.

The HC recently allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the Trial Court for fresh adjudication after the Temple, which functions under the Endowment Department, produced documents for the first time to show that the allotment of the site under the Ashraya Scheme was subsequently revoked.

The Temple as well as the Revenue Department and the Commissioner of Endowment and Charitable Trust, had approached the HC with appeals. They challenged the decree and judgement passed by a Trial Court on September 25, 2004.

PG Dhar maiah had claimed that a 20 ft x 30 ft site in Jaraganahalli, now called, Hari Colony in Banashankari 2nd Stage was allotted by the Tahasildar under the Ashrya Schme to him.

The ‘hakku patra’ (ownership document) was given to him in 1991 with the condition that he cannot alienate the property for 20 years. Dharmaiah had built a shed on the property. On July 20, 2002, some men under the Executive Officer of the Banashankari Temple demolished the shed to take possession of the site.

Dharmaiah approached the court seeking an injunction against them. The Temple authorities claimed that no ‘hakku patra’ was issued in his name and what he had produced in the court was a concocted document. The Trial Court ruled in favour of Dharmaiah and granted injunction against the Temple authorities from interfering in the property. The Temple and the Endowment authorities filed the appeal in the HC against this order.

Justice HT Narendra Prasad, who heard the appeals, gave his judgement recently. The Court noted that there is new evidence in the case.

“For the first time, before this Court, defendant No.4 (Temple) has filed an application producing the order passed by the Tahasildar in respect of cancellation of hakku patra issued in respect of Sy.Nos. 65 and 66. This document has not been produced before the trial court for deciding the case. Now the contention of the defendants is that the hakku patra issued in favour of the plaintiff has been cancelled, that has not been challenged by the plaintiff and that has attained finality.”

The HC therefore said that this aspect is to be considered by the Trial Court.

“Under these circumstances, to give one more opportunity to the parties, the matter requires to be remitted back to the trial court for fresh consideration in accordance with law.”

Disposing the appeals, the HC said, “The matter stands remitted back to the trial court, with liberty to both the parties to file additional documents and adduce additional evidence and also liberty to the defendants to file written statement. The trial court is directed to re-consider the matter afresh, in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.” (RFA 1110/2006)