Karnataka High Court
Silverline Business And Tech Parks ... vs Bruhath Bangalore Mahangara Palike on 6 November, 2012
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer
Bench: S.Abdul Nazeer
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 06th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2012
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.ABDUL NAZEER
WRIT PETITION No.36556 OF 2012 (LB-BMP)
BETWEEN:
SILVERLINE BUSINESS AND TECH
PARKS LIMITED,
A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT 201, BARTON CENTRE,
84, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 001
REP. HEREIN BY ITS DIRECTOR
MR.ZAHED MAHMOOD. ... PETITIONER
(BY SRI R.V.S.NAIK, ADV. FOR M/S.KING & PARTRIDGE, ADVs.)
AND
1 BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA
PALIKE, N.R.SQUARE,
J.C.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 002
REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
2 THE JOINT COMMISSIONER,
MAHADEVAPURA ZONE,
BRUHAT BANGALORE MAHANAGARA
PALIKE, MAHADEVAPURA, BANGALORE.
3 THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER,
HOODI SUB-DIVISION,
FIRST FLOOR, COMMERCIAL COMPLEX
WHITEFIELD ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 048. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.V.MURALIDHAR, ADV.)
2
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 2.8.10 VIDE ANX-E ISSUED
BY R3 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner contends that it was the owner of the property bearing No.180 situated in Export Promotion Industrial Park, Industrial Area, II Phase, Whitefield, Bangalore. The said land was allotted by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) to the petitioner on lease-cum-sale basis for establishing a Software Technology Park and Incubation Facility for IT Enabled Services. The sale deed was executed by the KIADB on 28.8.2008. After the execution of the sale deed as above, certain portion of the property was sold by the petitioner to third parties. Thereafter, petitioner made an application to the 3rd respondent for bifurcation of the katha and to issue a 3 fresh katha certificate in respect of the portion or property retained by it as per Annexure-C. The 3rd respondent has issued an endorsement as per annexure-E dated 2.8.2010 stating that in view of the pendency of certain cases before the Courts, application of the petitioner for bifurcation of the katha cannot be considered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed representations as per Annexures-F & G informing the 3rd respondent that the cases in respect of the property in question have already been concluded. The only case relating to the property tax is pending before the District Court, which has nothing to do with the bifurcation of the property. He submits that in the light of the representations at Annexures-F and G, 3rd respondent may be directed to consider the application at Annexure-C. 4
4. Perusal of the endorsement at Annexure-E would indicate that 3rd respondent has not bifurcated the katha on the ground that certain cases are pending in respect of the property in question before different Courts. In the representations at Annexures-F and G, petitioner has stated that those cases have been concluded. The Taxation Appeal is pending before the District Court, which has nothing to do with the bifurcation of the katha. I am of the view that the 3rd respondent has to consider the representations at Annexures-F & G at an early date. Therefore, I direct the 3rd respondent to consider the application for bifurcation of the katha taking into account the representations made at Annexures-F and G within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE KLY/