Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Mr P M K Aftab S/O Mr. P.Abdul Gafoor vs State Of Karnataka Repby Principal Secy ... on 17 March, 2009

Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar

Bench: Mohan Shantanagoudar

-1-

IN THE HIGH coum' OF KARNATAKA M  _

DATED "mzs THE 17" DAXQE Maizcaj  V %  

BEFOREZ';  X T

THE HON'BLE MR-JU5TZCEbts1i.V:C}%¥AN 5Pr¥fiMfAl§§g§xE«OUDAi2" 

wan r>§TITI§::N r§n§.%L:%51%2i22oAo7 (EDA)

Between :

§~'.M.K. Aftab    
Aged about E"_~"~_1 gfcazs  * _
S/<1 P. Abdul  
Rfa A245 15,' Kstighna,' I.-519:'-;1<,_
Natiatzai Games VI*I{§11.Sii3e§'*,_ .. '

Complex;-.Kerama;ig.sfl.a __  ..

BangaZorc--"56C* G47. " .A .-- V  ..Pet1f:1oner

(By  Jayakumaf Pétil. Sr. Counsel for

 *    Na11éi1a*3r..'--.--«,';Advs.,)

1." .Sta%:c of-riarnataka
Rap by 'P.rE1c:i.pa1 Secretary
To Gcivcrnment, Urban
~ !I)evek:f;§Incnt/ Housing
.. A' Sagaaxunent
* {iqvernment of Karnataka

 Vidhana Soudha

'_ 3 }::'»anga1ore«--56{} ()0 I.

 »  2. 'l'i:1£: Commissioner

Bangaiore Development Authextity
T. Chowdajah Road



Kumala Park (East)
Bangalore-560 020.

3. The Deputy Secretary
Bangaiore Development Authority
T. Chowciaiah Road
Knmara Park (East)
Bangalore-S60 G20.   

4. 5.13. Singh

S/o Mathura Prasad

No.160, I Main Road

1031 Cmss, Rajmahal

Vilas Extension      

2%' Stage, Bangalore-94'."v~..  _  --,_ ,  ..Respondents

(By Sri Keshava Reddy. ASA. s Sri V. Abdul Khaciei', g=.dv.:,"f<:r--5:z=;*.} ' 'i'hjs. "1'£}1¥£if;I'»'§VAI'tiClCS 226 8:. 227 of the Consfim;£.iQn--. of is quash the OI'd6}' dated 29«~9- 2006 {A1:r:e§i1;_1'e-zl§{)VV';J_s.LS:-s5t:{iV ithe second respondent and the third e gégéspondent - the petitioners site to the fourth respqndeiitas void abinitio and etc., ';i'¥1is.\c\*;'fi§'Ae:}'etitien coming on for hearing this day, the "£§ou1't mafie; the foiiowing :

-3-

O R 13 E R Petitioner was allotted site having dimension of___5(}' x 80' by the respondents-authorities vide flefter dated 31.5.2000. Copy' of the allotxhehi orderi'i'ge.',pi*o{l§ueed:'' .
at Armexure-»'A' to the was required to pay 8. Withih 90 days from the date the-N _' However, petitioner requesting the (and respoxiclezig' of the site ailottedijto -_ apprehended that the allotted sitiiie is haviinige' dimension than 50' X 80'. Sixzxiler repreeefitzaliene were made from time '(:9 time, but
-Ifeepojfitdent did not choose to measure the land. i~io*s>§9e*2ef,i 'V meanwhile, the petitioner paid the sale '.eonsieeI9éfieh in installments not fully, but partially. As 3.2004, the balance amount due by the petitioner Rs.1,{)4,35U/-. 'l'hus, a demand notice dated fl'2i§.3.f2{}U4 was issued to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to pay the balance amount of l-€s.1,U4,35()/ -

V"

through demand draft Within 15 days fi"om However, according to the petitioner, he has _;'*eceij;z¢(i1' the said notice oniy on 22.5.2004 and made.t.h.evL:0£'.. the said amount on the very Ida}?-..ei,T¢:.4,€_c')zfj"--2'i2w.';'§,_2£§§)4 through demand draft. '1'h.epeaftei',af'lfif;eV order dated 22" September ifjheivvfaflotuxent of site made in favouryczftile :0:1_ the gouxgd that he has paid mee.ba:an,ccee%of ¢5r;s:§i¢:~§eon beiatedly. Questioning herein flied 'Writ PetitioxyvN§QV. §'4§%6Vi% Court. The said writ petitioIi:§.vas* 'ogfi Fe ijmmy 200'? . Consequentiy, the order reLa.tiz1gV"to.'4Cé1x1eé:£l%aLtion of site passed against the _ petiticigiefwas and the matter was remitted to the J:i,a;:r2ga101fe'.+i36;i%e}_<_}pz':1er1t Authority for fresh consiéeration ef' that the petitiener has paid the baiance 'pf t£1eia.zii£,f§1I..ii%:. The BDA curiousiy aiiotted the very site in of respondent No.4 under 'G' Category in the ____"."mear1While. Thus, this writ petitiezl is filed questioning ' ;=the allotment made in favour of 411* respondent vide W
- 5- Annexure«'l<;' dated 29.9.2006. Writ in the nglttiie of mandamus is also sought for directing the-_ ;'2!'I*<*' _ respondent to execute the Sale; fl petitioner.
3. The 4th respc1;1dent""tliQt1'§i1..is eetvedvj with the notice, has remained ti lgeard both the learned adveeatzee maintained by EDA wn1cn%ta:£:'ezgi;aee tr,» the Court by Sri Abdul liliacleij," en behalf of EDA.
4. R'-itiie no that the petitioner did not pay the sitai valtiev_:iI£11i;ezilafély after the allotment, However, 't V' he pay theeeme in installments. So also, BDA to pay the amounts from time to time in ieyou? §'.v'i:ll1e petitioner. Ultimately, the endorsement .u"""--._V:élated ..2.'.§:.3.20U4 vide Annexure--'l<" is issued to the , tpetitiener calling upon the petitioner to» pay the sital value eflli-\'s.l,{)4,35()/~ through demand draft Witllin 15 days. " V which mwns, the BDA has extended time to pay the V' amounts till 15 days after 22.3.2004. _ petitioner paid the balance ameugjgt of yi'\"S.-,j~_: "

threugh demand cirafl: on 22.S.2(}U3i~., ' A' 45 days delay in paying the balegmee ei11._o§1:1t of v the petitioner. The EDA.

Having kept quite for .t§V;_) EDA chose to cancel the afletgiexjgt "fevour of A the petitioner byi. §§enexure»"H' dated 2235' vide Annexure«--'H' dated quashed by this Court in Writ Petitioii4:~§%o;.14ae?g2~:§%0e. 11; is relevant to note that, " '%.vt;i1e..'j§§s1;i§1g.__z1otiee' £*f.,¥jh§.S writ petition to EDA, this Court .91" maintenance of status quo with regard ' to t}:e"'eite_i:i'e:i;fiestien on 17th October 2006. However, in . the meaI1§§;1ile, the BDA g'a11ted the very site in favour of ?%';f»'--'*i§A vreejgtendent under 'G' category. Thus, it is clear that 54?-h respondent is allotted site in questien witlnin seven idays from the date of the order vide Annexure-"H,', by }.J\

- 7 .. _ which the site allotted in favour of the mfitionefe._was cancelled .

5. It is vehemently contentedtlbjf Patil, learned Senior Advocate:appea.riI1g of petitioner that the t:'avetu~ of 4th respondent is zjsotivatetiit #15 respondent is the father (§f'tf1._€3:3'.i'1t3I1 Chief Minister of the the allotment letter, aceordzvigtngtto' is the address of the govemieent; the Private Secretary of the then, iihjei' of the State was residing during the as it may, this Court does not Wfisff_: «to~v4enfte:f'-i:1to that controversy at this stage in this writ"--pet:ifio:d;' However, having regard to the totaiity of the W circumstances anti as the petitioner had been representations to air his grievances relating to T "measurement of the site and as the BDA itself had extended time to pay the amount on 22.3.2004, in my \~/A ..3- considered opinion, BDA could not have impugned order htmiedly. Admittedly, m%ee:.ge%sm.ae;er, the. payment was made on 22.5.2002}. ._-The received by BDA. Having kept.__guite-for abetite the order dated 221%? i_ passed, canceling the aiietmerihof in favour of the petitioner. As ei'eremeriiiofiedi* Corder dated 221*' September Court, with a.

specific,direc'tionf*-:29_ ..to_rieconsider the matter in the the entire sitai value made by the petititmt-.1" , " extended period. Without V. _eonsi~i<ierii1gVVM the «direction by this Court in promr very site is allotted in favour of the 4th resptrzfiderrti "virtue of the order dated 29.9.2006 vide '2Annexhre.--'1§'.'. in Vi€'W of the same, this Court is of the opinion that interest ofjustice wiii be met if the K aiietstuent in faveur of the 431 respondent is set aside. ' 'he petitioner has stood in queue and got the aiiotment of the site. As aforementioned, the fauit iies with the petitioner W .. 9 ..

also in not making the payments in time. However, he has made the payment after 45 days of period. However, having rwand to t and circumstances, this <_'4')e__I_'t pfopbses the': > aliotment made in favour of to payment of interestv 1% 13.21. by the Pfititioner. '1'he-- site is ;::i's: clear from the document et V' the office of the i£xecutive_._ fijeveiopment Authority; Accordingly, 'o1f(ier is made 2 The uxozjoer Aauoenen: made in favour of the 4% vide' Annexuze-'K' dated 29.9.2006 stands

-sital value, if any paid by 4113 respondent, to him withi11 two months from the date , 'yof reee§.ot:.of this order. in the alternative, any other site 'soft dimension may be allotted to him, if he so ' cfioeses. The petitioner shat! pay interest at the rate of u 21% pa. on the site value from the date of allotment tilt Eh/!'> *b:c/ K -19- the date of payment i.e., 22.5.2004. to be executed by Bangalore Development 1 .. favour of petitioner with regard to: -sift: ; .' Writ petiticn is allowed