Karnataka High Court
Prestige Estates Projects Ltd vs Mr. Ganesh Kumar Kodavuru on 2 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB
WP No. 26314 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT PETITION NO. 26314 OF 2023 (GM-CON)
BETWEEN:
1. PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS LTD.,
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956,
HAVING REGISTERED ADDRESS AT:
PRESTIGE FALCON TOWERS,
19, BRUNTON ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 025.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
T. ARVIND PAI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
2. MR. ALEEMULLA KHAN @ MUSHTAQ PASHA,
RESIDING AT NO. 19, KHAN VILLA,
Digitally LEONARD LANE, RICHMOND TOWN,
signed by K G BENGALURU - 560 025.
RENUKAMBA REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER,
Location: PRESTIGE ESTATES PROJECTS LIMITED,
High Court of THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
Karnataka ARVIND PAI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI. SHRIKARA P K.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR. GANESH KUMAR KODAVURU,
S/O. SH. DINISH KUMAR K.P,
MAJOR,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB
WP No. 26314 of 2023
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.92,
1ST MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
PANDURANGANAGAR,
OPP. HSBBC, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
2. MRS. SARAVANTHI SANKRANTHI,
W/O. MR. GANESH KUMAR KODAVURU,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.92,
1ST MAIN, 5TH CROSS,
PANDURANGANAGAR,
OPP. HSBBC, BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 076.
3. MR. UPPALURI SRINIVAS,
S/O. SH. U. DHANAMJAYA,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT 1/4, NGEF OLD,
OTRS SADANANDA NAGAR ROAD,
KRISHNAIAHNA PALYA,
BENGALURU - 560 038.
4. MRS. BOBBA SATYA SREE,
W/O. MR. UPPALURI SRINIVAS,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT 1/4, NGEF OLD,
OTRS SADANANDA NAGAR ROAD,
KRISHNAIAHNA PALYA,
BENGALURU - 560 038.
5. MR. CHANDRASHEKAR. K,
S/O. SH. KRISHNA REDDY. R,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT NO. 29,
PRESTIGE AUGUSTA GOLD VILLAGE,
OPPOSITE SAI BHABA TEMPLE,
KADA AGRAHARA MAIN ROAD,
RAMPURA, VIRGO NAGAR POST OFFICE,
BENGALURU-560 049.
6. MRS. SAUDHA. M,
W/O. MR. CHANDRASHEKHAR. K,
MAJOR,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB
WP No. 26314 of 2023
RESIDING AT NO.29,
PRESTIGE AUGUSTA GOLD VILLAGE,
OPPOSITE SAI BHABA TEMPLE,
KADA AGRAHARA MAIN ROAD,
RAMPURA, VIRGO NAGAR POST OFFICE,
BENGALURU - 560 049.
7. MR. PARAMESWARA REDDY DEVI,
S/O. SH. D. RAMAKRISHNA REDDY,
MAJOR,
THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
DEVI SANAKARA REDDY,
RESIDING AT NO.1319,
15TH MAIN, 20TH CROSS,
'A' BLOCK, SAHAKARNAGAR,
BENGALURU -560 093.
ALSO AT 12-04, TOWER 2,
PARC VISTA,
452, COORPORATION ROAD,
SINGAPORE - 649 811.
8. MR. MADHUSUDAN NAIR,
S/O. LATE SH. P. K. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
MAJOR,
THROUGH HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
MR. MEGHANSH NAIR,
RESIDING AT A95,
GROUND FLOOR, GREENWOOD CITY,
SECTOR-45, GURGAON - 122 003,
HARYANA STATE.
9. MR. AKSHAT KAPOOR,
S/O. SH. RAMESH CHANDER KAPOOR,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT NO.B-003,
NAGARJUNA GREENWOODS,
KADUBISINAHALLI,
BANGALORE - 560 103.
10. MRS. PUNITA KAPOOR,
W/O. MR. AKSHAT KAPOOR,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT NO.B-003,
NAGARJUNA GREEN WOODS,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB
WP No. 26314 of 2023
KADUBISINAHALLI,
BANGALORE - 560 103.
11. MR. RAJESH REGE,
S/O. SH. MADHUKAE RAGE,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT 72,
LANGFORD COURT APARTMENTS,
9, LANGFORD GARDENS,
BENGALURU - 560 025.
12. MRS. SEETAL R IYER,
W/O. MR. RAJESH REGE,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT 72,
LANGFORD COURT APARTMENTS,
9, LANGFORD GARDENS,
BENGALURU - 560 025.
13. DR. SULAKSHANA KUMAR,
W/O. LATE COL. GIRISH KUMAR,
VSM, MAJOR,
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. 2366,
ASHADEEP, 6TH CROSS,
KAMMANAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
RAMAIAH LAYOUT,
ST. THOMAS TOWN POST,
BENGALURU - 560 084.
14. LT. COL. GIRISH KUMAR,
S/O. LT. COL. (LATE) YATINDRA KUMAR,
MAJOR,
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.2366,
ASHADEEP, 6TH CROSS,
KAMMANAHALLI MAIN ROAD,
RAMAIAH LAYOUT,
ST. THOMAS TOWN POST,
BENGALURU-560 084.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NAVEEN R NATH, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT. RESHMA K T, ADVOCATE)
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB
WP No. 26314 of 2023
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
20.10.2023 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE NATIONAL CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI (VIDE
ANNEXURE-A) AND CONSEQUENTLY QUASH ALL ACTIONS
PURSUANT TO THE SAME AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO) The challenge in this petition as contended by Sri. Dhyan Chinnappa, learned Senior Counsel is to an order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), New Delhi ('Commission' for short) dated 20.10.2023, whereby the Commission has, on an application filed by the respondents herein under Section 35(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, has at -6- NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB WP No. 26314 of 2023 page No.40 (page No.5 of the impugned order), stated as under:
"In the opinion of this Commission, this contention and its oneness is common to all and everybody who has applied under the said scheme inasmuch as in the event if the land is not available for construction or its utilization and usage for residential purposes as indicated in the agreement, then it is certainly a common representative cause on behalf of everybody applying under the said scheme. Thus this application, therefore, in my opinion deserves to be allowed and the complainants deserve to be permitted to pursue the complaint in representative capacity as it will have a direct impact on all the applicants/allotees/owners. It is ordered accordingly.
The application under section 35(1)(c) of the Act is allowed and stands disposed of."
2. According to him, the challenge is also to the direction of the Commission, at page No.41 (page No.6 of the impugned order), wherein the following has been stated:
"Learned counsel for the complainants are directed to carry out the publication of the public -7- NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB WP No. 26314 of 2023 notice in terms of this order for being displayed in the locality in which the property is situate or the complainants reside in newspapers, namely, Deccan Herald (English daily) and one local newspaper in vernacular language. The publication be carried out within two months."
3. Sri. Chinnappa, submits that the directions of the Commission in the manner given, shall cover/include all the applicants/allottees/owners, who are not the complainants before the Commission which is clearly untenable. He states, the second direction, which follows this conclusion is also untenable and liable to be set aside.
4. On the other hand, Sri. Naveen R.Nath, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents would, on instructions, submit insofar as the second direction of the Commission directing the complainants to carry out a publication of the public notice for being displayed in the locality where the property is situated, though has been made, but has not resulted in any other applicant/allottee/owner approaching the Commission with his/her grievance against the -8- NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB WP No. 26314 of 2023 petitioners herein. In other words, his submission is that though direction has been given, but the same is without consequence. Insofar as the first direction is concerned, Sri. Nath submits that he has no objection if the complaint which has been filed before the Commission is pursued by the ten complainants i.e., eight original complainants and two impleaded complainants. In other words, the direction of the Commission that the complaint shall be treated in the representative capacity may be set aside. He also states, the order passed by this Court setting aside the first direction of the Commission must not be construed that the applicants/allottees/owners cannot approach the Commission or any other Forum for their grievance in respect of the present project against the petitioners in fresh proceedings.
5. In view of the submission of Sri. Nath, the order of NCDRC (at page No.40), which we have reproduced, is set aside.
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC:30713-DB WP No. 26314 of 2023
6. We make it clear that this order shall not preclude any applicant/owner/allottee to seek such remedy as available in law including before NCDRC in respect of the project in question.
With the above, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(V KAMESWAR RAO) JUDGE Sd/-
(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40