Karnataka High Court
Gravity One Living Space Pvt. Ltd vs Naagamma on 25 October, 2025
Author: R Devdas
Bench: R Devdas
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:42333
RP No. 319 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
REVIEW PETITION NO.319 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
GRAVITY ONE LIVING SPACE PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY INCORPORATED AND
REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT 2013
WITH ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
NO.1062, VISHNUVARDHANA ROAD
OPP. ZILLA PANCHAYATH
CHAMARAJAPURAM
MYSURU-570 005
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
DHANANJAY BASAVARAJU
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI N. DEVADAS, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI RUPESH KUMAR S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by NAAGAMMA
KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
LAXMI W/O. LATE CHAMARAJU
YASHODA
RESIDING AT MARATIKYATHANAHALLI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF JAYAPURA HOBLI
KARNATAKA MYSURU TALUK-570 026
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI ROOPESHA B., ADVOCATE)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLVII
RULE 1 READ WITH SECTION 114 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS IN
C.M.P. NO.418 OF 2021 AND REVIEW THE JUDGMENT DATED
09.02.2023 IN C.M.P. NO.418 OF 2021 BY REFERRING THE
MATTER FOR ADJUDICATION TO THE LEARNED ARBITRATOR.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:42333
RP No. 319 of 2023
HC-KAR
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS COMING ON FOR FURTHER
ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R DEVDAS
ORAL ORDER
Learned Senior Counsel Sri N.Devadas appearing for the review petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the Continued Joint Development Agreement dated 07.11.2014, which was taken note of by this Court while disposing of the Civil Miscellaneous Petition.
2. However, learned Senior Counsel submits while pointing out to one of the clauses of the Continued Joint Development Agreement that although a period of 12 months are stipulated for the contract, nevertheless, it precedes with the requirement that the period of 12 months shall commence from the date when which necessary clearances are obtained from the Mysore Urban Development Authority, having regard to the restrictions on Zonal Regulations placed in the then revised Master Plan. The learned Senior Counsel would therefore submit -3- NC: 2025:KHC:42333 RP No. 319 of 2023 HC-KAR that although it is true that 12 months period have been stipulated for completion of the contract, nevertheless, the period commences from the date when which the clearances of the Mysore Urban Development Authority is secured by the parties. Learned Senior Counsel therefore submits that this important condition having not been noticed by this Court, the order has been passed rejecting the Civil Miscellaneous petition filed at the hands of the petitioner herein.
3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that even in terms of the notice issued by the petitioner herein as found at Annexure 'L' dated 17.8.2021 in paragraph No.6, the petitioner has admitted that the revised Master Plan of Mysuru and Nanjangud was released on 12.01.2016. Learned counsel would therefore submit that even if it is taken that the revised Master Plan was released on 12.01.2016, no steps were taken by the petitioner to get the necessary clearances at the hands of the Mysore Urban Development Authority. -4-
NC: 2025:KHC:42333 RP No. 319 of 2023 HC-KAR
4. To this, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the review petitioner submits that the entire content of the notice have to be read by this Court. It is pointed out that immediately after the revised Master Plan was released on 12.01.2016, several attempts were made at the hands of the petitioner calling upon the respondent herein to co- operate in the matter of getting the clearances at the hands of the Mysore Urban Development Authority. It is also stated in the notice that the respondent has not co- operated in getting the clearances at the hands of the Mysore Urban Development Authority.
5. In that view of the matter, learned Senior Counsel submits that the order passed in the Civil Miscellaneous Petition has to be recalled to enable the parties to address their arguments afresh.
6. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri N. Devadas for the review petitioner, learned Counsel Sri Roopesha B., for the respondent and perused the petition papers. -5-
NC: 2025:KHC:42333 RP No. 319 of 2023 HC-KAR
7. Having heard the learned Counsels, this Court is of the considered opinion that the review petitioner has made out a case on the ground that there is an error apparent on the face of the record. The clause in the Continued Joint Development Agreement clearly states that the period of twelve months for completion of the contract would commence after necessary clearances are obtained at the hands of the competent authority, viz., the Mysore Urban Development Authority. The ground on which the order was passed by this Court rejecting the Civil Miscellaneous Petition was that even according to the Continued Joint Development Agreement, a period of 12 months was stipulated and the date of the Continued Joint Development Agreement was taken into consideration. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the review petitioner, what was not noticed by this Court was the conditions stipulated in the Continued Joint Development Agreement. The matter therefore requires reconsideration. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:42333 RP No. 319 of 2023 HC-KAR
8. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed. The order dated 09.02.2023 in CMP No.418/2021 is hereby recalled. The Civil Miscellaneous petition stands restored to its original file.
Office is directed to re-list the Civil Miscellaneous Petition before the bench having roster.
All contentions of the parties are kept open.
Sd/-
(R DEVDAS) JUDGE JT/-
CT:VC