Supreme Court Facilitates Landmark Settlement Between BBMP and Defence Ministry Over Encroached Land.


27 October 2025 Special Leave Petition >> Civil & Consumer Law  

In an effort to put an end to a long-standing institutional standoff, the Supreme Court of India has helped facilitate an out-of-court resolution between the Ministry of Defence and the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) over unauthorized development on defence land in Bengaluru. The Court, presided over by Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan, disposed of SLP (C) No. 23768 of 2022 on October 27, 2025, after observing that both parties had settled their differences in principle.

The controversy, spanning close to four decades, is over land in Survey Nos. 84, 90, and 99 in Binnamangala Village, Bengaluru North Taluk. Initially purchased for defence in the 1970s, sections of this land were encroached upon in the 1980s when the then Bangalore City Corporation built seven multistoried residential blocks, one Anganwadi, and supporting infrastructure without formal sanction. The encroachment resulted in decades of litigation that cut across several levels of the judiciary.


 

 

The Karnataka High Court in its 2022 ruling had vociferously criticized the Corporation for going beyond its jurisdiction, calling the construction "illegal" and the assertion of possession untenable. The Court had noted that the Corporation had failed to present any documentary evidence proving legitimate ownership or building permits and allowed the Union of India to repossess possession after due legal process. Stringent observations were also leveled against misutilization of public funds and the necessity for internal checks within the BBMP.

In subsequent to that judgment, the BBMP moved the Supreme Court in a Special Leave Petition. Conceding that the controversy concerned two public authorities, the Court previously urged amicable settlement. Following that hint, the BBMP offered a settlement of Rs. 34.03 crore for 1 acre and 18 guntas of encroached defence land. The Ministry of Defence, on joint inspection and official verification, communicated its in-principle approval on July 9, 2025, pending final Cabinet clearance. Further, BBMP undertook to raze existing buildings and transfer 18 guntas of surrounding lake land (Survey No. 99) in an encumbrance-free status.

Having recorded the favorable developments, on October 27, 2025, the Supreme Court declined further adjudication, instructing that formal procedures be conducted in conformity with the approval of the Ministry. The Court's terminating comments indicated satisfaction that a reasonable resolution had been reached through discussions and not through lengthy litigation.

This case highlights how judicial persuasion can overcome institutional fault lines and facilitate pragmatic cooperation among state institutions. By transforming a disputed property case into a formal settlement, the Supreme Court not only re-established administrative equilibrium but also strengthened accountability in public administration.