Karnataka High Court
Mahesh Kumar. V vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 June, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:23395
WP No. 12368 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 12368 OF 2023 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
MAHESH KUMAR. V
S/O NARAYANA AITHAL V
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.305,
UNIWORTH PEARL, OFF BELLARY ROAD,
AMRUTH NAGAR "A" SECTOR,
BENGALURU - 560 092.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. REYNOLD D'SOUZA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BANGALORE CITY DISTRICT,
KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD,
Digitally BANGALORE - 560 009.
signed by
Vandana S 3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
Location: REGULATORY AUTHORITY
HIGH 2ND FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE
COURT OF BLOCK UNITY BUILDING , CSI COMPOUND,
KARNATAKA BENGALURU - 560 027.
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
4. M/S OZONE REALTORS PVT LTD,
INCORPORATED UNDER INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 1956.
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.51/7-1,
RATHNA AVENUE, OFF.RICHMOND ROAD,
CIVIL STATION, BANGALORE - 560 025.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAGHAVENDRA S H, AGA FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C ULLAL, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:23395
WP No. 12368 of 2023
SMT. VANDANA P L, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WP FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT R2 TO IMPLEMENT THE
ORDER DTD 04.01.2023 IN NO: RERA/ REVENUE / 8643 / 2022-23 AND
RECOVERY CERTIFICATE DATED 04.01.2023 IN NO: RERA/ REVENUE /
8643 /2022-23 PASSED BY THE R3 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER VIDE
ANNEXURE-A AND B RESPECTIVELY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:
"A. Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to implement the order dated 04.01.2023 in No.RERA/Revenue/8643/2022-23 and Recovery Certificate dated 04.01.2023 in No.RERA/Revenue/8643/2022-23 passed by the Respondent No.3 in favour of the petitioner vide ANNEXURE-A AND B respectively.
B. Issue any other writ or order or direction that deems fit to grants in the circumstances of the case, in the interests of justice and equity."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4 and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the memorandum of petition and referring to the material on record, learned Counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the orders -3- NC: 2024:KHC:23395 WP No. 12368 of 2023 passed by The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority ("RERA") dated 11.10.2022 followed by Execution orders dated 27.12.2022 pursuant to which the RERA Authority has issued a Revenue Recovery Certificate (for short 'RRC') addressed to the Jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner to take further steps in this regard.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that despite the aforesaid orders passed by the RERA Authority, Execution orders and the Revenue Recovery Certificates, Jurisdictional Tahasildar is not taking steps pursuant thereto and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon the judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Naveen Kumar D.T & Others Vs The State of Karnataka & Others - WP.No.1569/2024 dated 22.01.2024 disposed of the petition and as such the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid orders.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 submits in the event the respondent Nos.1 to 3 are directed to take necessary steps pursuant to the Revenue Recovery Certificates, -4- NC: 2024:KHC:23395 WP No. 12368 of 2023 directions may be issued to the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to provide an opportunity to the respondent No.4 and proceed further in accordance with law.
6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in Naveen Kumar D.T's case supra, this Court held as under:
ORDER "The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayer:
"A. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other writ, directing Respondents No.1 and Respondent No.2 to enforce payment of amounts due from Respondent No.3 in accordance with the procedure for recovery provided under the provisions of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and rules there under, for enforcement of the directions of K- RERA Revenue/9591/2022-23, dt- 13/2/2023 issued under Section 40 (1) of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and Rule 25 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017;
B. GRANT such other relief's, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case, in the interests ofjustice and equity"-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:23395 WP No. 12368 of 2023
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri.Akash Bantia, and the learned HCGP Sri.Kiran Kumar, appearing for the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue in the lis stands answered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.6545/2023 disposed on 30.05.2023, wherein the co-ordinate Bench has held as follows:
"The short grievance of the Petitioner is as to the longevity of the Execution Process involving implementation of the orders of Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA). Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the implementation of those orders cannot be a Five Year Plan as it has to be accomplished in accordance with the intent ofParliament in enacting the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016.
2. Learned AGA appearing for the Respondents opposes the Petition contending that already the process for implementation is set on initiated and that would take by its very nature some long period and that its accomplishment no assurance can be given as to within what period the same would be done. This is bit difficult to countenance. At least, as a concession to the shortness of human life the matters of this kind should be accomplished on a war footing should the property be available. If no property avails, the question of implementation would not arise.-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:23395 WP No. 12368 of 2023 In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed in part; the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are directed to accomplish the implementation of the subject K-RERA orders and report compliance to the Registrar General of this Court within an outer limit of three months failing which heavy costs personably payable may be levied on an appropriate application being moved by the Petitioner.
Now, no costs."
4. The petitioners are also similarly situated home buyers, in their arm, an order passed by RERA of the kind that was considered by the co-ordinate Bench in the aforesaid writ petition (supra).
5. Learned HCGP would submit that three months time was granted therein, but would seek another month at the hands of this Court.
6. The submission is placed on record.
7. The order shall be complied with, within an outer limit of four months.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.
7. It is an undisputed fact that the aforesaid petition was filed by the writ petitioners therein who are identical / similarly situated to the present petitioner and directions were issued to the respondents including respondent No.4 therein who is none other -7- NC: 2024:KHC:23395 WP No. 12368 of 2023 than respondent No.4 in the present petition. Under these circumstances, I deem it just and appropriate to dispose of the present petition directing respondent Nos.1 to 3 to take further steps pursuant to the Revenue Recovery Certificate at Annexure - B and proceed further in accordance with law within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is further directed that the respondent Nos.1 to 3 shall comply with the directions issued in the present order after providing an opportunity in this regard to the respondent No.4. Further, the submission made on instructions by learned Senior counsel for respondent No.4 that respondent No.4 would not alienate, encumber or create any third party rights over the subject flat(s) of the petitioner involved in the present petition is placed on record for a period of 3 months from today.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23