Ikian Furnitures Pvt Ltd vs The Chairman on 20 February, 2017

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Ikian Furnitures Pvt Ltd vs The Chairman on 20 February, 2017

Bench: A.S. Bopanna

                            1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

   DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017

                           BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA

       WRIT PETITION NO.195/2014 (GM-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

IKIAN FURNITURES PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY REGISTERED
UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
AT NO.89, KANNAN BUILDING
M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-01
REPRESENTED HEREIN BY
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
MR RAMESH KUMAR DUGAR
S/O.MR.HUKUMCHAND DUGAR
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS                   ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI K.CHANDRANATH ARIGA, ADV.)

AND

THE CHAIRMAN
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
NO.14/3, II FLOOR
RASTROTHANA PARISHATH BUILDING
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001                    ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI B.B.PATIL, ADV.)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO HAND OVER POSSESSION
OF PLOT NO.102, BIDADI INDUSTRIAL AREA, II PHASE, II
SECTOR (REVISED LAYOUT) TO THE PETITIONER AND
                             2



DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO EXECUTE LEASE CUM SALE
DEED OF PLOT NO.102, BIDADI INDUSTRIAL AREA, II
PHASE, II SECTOR [REVISED LAYOUT] TO THE
PETITIONER.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
                         ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court seeking that the respondent be directed to handover possession of Plot No.102, Bidadi Industrial Area, II Phase, II Sector (Revised layout) to the petitioner. In that light, the petitioner is further seeking to direct the respondent to execute the lease cum sale deed for the said plot.

2. The petitioner being an Industrialist had applied for allotment of plot in the Industrial Area of the respondent in Sector-II, Bidadi for establishing their factory. The fact that the petitioner's request was considered and an allotment was made through the order dated 08.12.2009 is not in dispute.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite the petitioner having paid the amount as sought as the 3 tentative cost for the allotment, the respondent has not put the petitioner in possession of the plot which was allotted and the documentation has not been completed. It is in that light, the petitioner is before this Court.

4. The respondent has filed the objection statement as also the additional statement of objection to the writ petition. Insofar as the allotment of plot as made, there is no serious dispute. However, what is contended is that a demand had been raised by the respondent through the communication dated 26.11.2012 requiring the petitioner to pay the sum of Rs.13,26,782/- being the balance cost of land and interest. In that light, it is contended that the further process had not been initiated as the demand as made has not been paid.

5. Further, the respondent has also referred to the extract of the proceedings of the 331st Meeting of the Board held on 19.09.2014, wherein a consideration of the aspect relating to allotment and the possession of such land being made to the allottee arose and in the 4 background of the Board not being in a position to put the allottees in possession where there were disputes relating to the property wherein the allotment was made was considered. It is only in such circumstances, certain benefit relating to payment of interest by the allottee has been considered to be adopted in appropriate cases.

6. If that be the position, in the instant case, those aspects of the matter would have to be kept in view and a decision will have to be taken by the respondent with regard to the allotment made to the petitioner and if there were any litigation with regard to the land wherein, the plot No.102 which has been allotted to the petitioner is located and in that circumstance, as to whether, at this point, still the petitioner is required to pay interest. This is a matter to be taken note by the respondent and a decision is to be arrived at.

7. Therefore, at this juncture, a positive mandamus to put the petitioner in possession and execute the documents would not arise. However, keeping in view the sequence of events as noticed above, 5 a direction is issued to the respondent to take note of the request of the petitioner, keep in view the Board resolution referred to above and arrive at a conclusion with regard to whether the petitioner is due to pay any further amounts to the respondent-Board and in that light, the availability of the plot in question without there being any further litigations relating to the land, wherein the plot has been formed. Based on such consideration, the respondent shall take steps to conclude the transaction thereafter.

8. To enable such consideration, the petitioner shall now file a representation along with all supporting documents and a copy of this order with the Chief Executive Officer and Executive Member of the respondent-Board. On receipt of the representation, the aspects as referred to above shall be taken note, take a decision and a communication be issued to the respondent in that regard. Needless to mention that, if any demand is raised by the respondent and the same is complied, further process shall be taken up by the 6 respondent to complete the transaction. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by any demand by the respondent and seeks to redress the same, contentions in that regard are left open to be taken up at that stage.

In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

JUDGE ST

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court