What is the growth in assets of re-contesting candidates from Bengaluru?

Curious to know how much would be the asset growth of the candidates who are re-contesting? Here's some data for you!

Here goes the list of growth of Assets of candidates for Bangalore Urban constituencies, who have contested earlier.  The list is a mere compilation from their affidavits.

Ananthkumar

 

Movable Asset (Rs)

Immovable Asset (Rs)

 Liability (Rs)

 Total Asset (Rs)

2009

99,82,432

68,85,163

0

1,68,67,595

2014

1,23,59,969

3,60,41,192

28,83,233

4,84,01,161

 

 

P C Mohan

 

Movable Asset (Rs)

Immovable Asset (Rs)

Liability (Rs)

Total Asset (Rs)

2009 (LS Election)

3,83,88,000

1,84,41,000

3,28,87,000

5,37,29.000

2013 (Assembly Election)

18,15,81,650

12,31,02,400

17,69,36,948

30,46,84,050

2014 (LS Election)

26,45,16,699

21,12,79,600

26,11,11,284

47,57,96,299

 

C  Narayanaswamy

 

Movable Asset (Rs)

Immovable Asset (Rs)

Liability (Rs)

Total Asset (Rs)

2008 (Assembly Election)

1,00,000

2,10,00,000

NIL

2,11,00,000

2014 (L S Election)

34,52,597

24,45,00,000

9,22,460

24,79,52,597

 

D V Sadananda Gowda

 

Movable Asset (Rs)

Immovable Asset (Rs)

Liability (Rs)

Total Asset (Rs)

2009 (LS Election)

48,43,959

1,12,28,000

24,86,447

1,60,71,959

2012 (MLC)

86,39,382

4,83,09,977

1,45,70,119

5,69,49,359

2014 (LS Election)

4,73,91,874

5,14,97,000

3,70,20,152

9,88,88,874

 

 

Abdul Azeem

Year

Movable Asset (Rs)

Immovable Asset (Rs)

Liability (Rs)

Total Asset (Rs)

Income (Rs)

2013

88,75,125

7,25,00,000

NIL

8,10,30,126

4,26,107

(2012-13)

2014

1,08,09,759

14,81,00,000

NIL

15,89,09,759

4,18,170

(2013-14)

Comments:

  1. Ravindra Karki says:

    Unimaginable Immovable asset growth for Sadanand Gowda in just two years ?? 86 lakhs to 4.73 crores ?? We can also give money to him so that he can also grow it 5 times in 2 years ??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Similar Story

Big promises, unheard residents: Bengaluru’s new parking rules need a rethink

The draft rules meant to manage road space demand end up expanding supply, outsourcing enforcement, and pricing residents out of their streets.

On August 11, the Urban Development Department quietly published the draft Greater Bengaluru Authority (Parking) Rules, 2026 — the legal framework  meant to give teeth to Bengaluru's much-discussed Parking Policy 2.0. Citizens have thirty days to send in objections. Yet, few will read all eighteen pages of the notification. Fewer still will notice that a law framed as a way to curb traffic demand is, on close reading, a plan to expand parking supply and hand over enforcement to private players, while leaving the ordinary resident worse off.  That gap between the promise and what’s on paper matters, because parking…

Similar Story

Citizens step up: How South Bengaluru volunteers solved SIR hurdles

From tracking down 2002 voter details to coordinating with overworked BLOs, community members in Bengaluru are stepping in where the system falls short.

While the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process aims to clean up electoral rolls, the enumeration forms created innumerable hurdles for existing voters. From tracking down elusive 2002 voter details to coordinating with overworked Booth Level Officers (BLOs), citizens across Bengaluru faced a daunting task completing the registration process. Recognising these challenges in their own neighbourhoods, volunteers led by three active citizens—Poongothai, Aparna Shamanth, and Venkatachalam Subramaniam—took it upon themselves to help people in their community and beyond.   Mapping the confusion in Gottigere Poongothai lives in Gottigere, which falls under the Bengaluru South assembly constituency. Her community consists of around 400…