Sri K S Basavaraja vs The Bangalore Development ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2180 Kant

                              1



   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                            BEFORE

   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

              W.P.No. 16833 OF 2021(BDA)

BETWEEN:

Sri. K.S. Basavaraja,
S/o Late Siddegowda,
Aged about 65 years,
Residing at No.35,
8th Cross, 5th main Road,
Panchasheelanagara,
Moodalapalya,
Bangalore-560 072.                       ... Petitioner

(By Sri.Vasanth Kumar H.T. Advocate (PH))

AND:

The Bangalore Development Authority,
T.Chowdaiah Road,
Kumara park East,
Bengaluru-560 020,
Reptd. By its Commissioner.                 ... Respondent

(By Sri. H.S.Suhas, Advocate for
Smt. Sujatha, B.A. Advocate (PH))

     This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of
the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent
to consider the representation of the petitioner dated:
14.07.2021 vide Annexure-F to execute the absolute sale
                                 2



deed in respect of site bearing No.63 situated at Sir MV
Layout 7th Block, Bengaluru.

       This writ petition, coming on for preliminary hearing
in 'B' group, this day, the Court, made t\he following:


                           ORDER

In this writ petition the petitioner has sought for

the following relief:

"(a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 14.07.2021 vide Annexure-F to execute the absolute sale deed in respect of site bearing No.63 situated at Sir M.V. Layout 7th Block, Bengaluru."

2. The brief facts of the case is that the

petitioner is the owner of the revenue site bearing

No.7 in Sy.No.27/2 measuring 30'x40' situated at

Ramasandra Village, Yashwanthapura Hobli,

Bengaluru North Taluk. The said land has been

acquired by the BDA after issuing the preliminary and

final notifications. Pursuant to that, in view of the

judgment of this Court in the case of JUNJAMMA vs.

THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

reported in ILR 2005 Kar.608 the petitioner has

approached the respondent for allotment of site.

Considering the request of the petitioner, the BDA has

passed a resolution as per Annexure-B dated

25.06.2007 for allotment of site measuring 30'x40' in

favour of the petitioner. Pursuant to the resolution the

respondent has issued allotment letter on 26.04.2019

vide Annexure-C with a condition that the petitioner has

to pay Rs.15,98,400/- as sital value. Further, the

BDA as per endorsement dated 09.04.2021 vide

Annexure-D has intimated the petitioner to pay

Rs.11,37,0000/- and produce the challan. Pursuant to

the said endorsement, the petitioner has paid

Rs.11,37,000/- on 12.04.2021 and the challan

has been produced as Annexure-E. Thereafter, the

respondent has not executed the absolute sale deed.

The petitioner has given a representation to the

respondent - BDA vide Annexure-F dated 14.07.2021.

Since the representation is not considered, the

petitioner is before this Court.

3. Sri H.T.Vasanth Kumar, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner has submitted that after

considering the request of the petitioner, the BDA has

passed the resolution allotting the site in favour of the

petitioner vide allotment letter dated 26.04.2019 and

thereafter issued an endorsement dated 09.04.2021

intimating the petitioner to deposit Rs.11,37,000/.

Pursuant to the said demand, the petitioner has paid

Rs.11,37,000/- on 12.04.2021. Inspite of that, the

BDA has not executed the sale deed. Therefore, he

filed a representation dated 14.07.2021 and the same

is not considered by the respondent - BDA. Hence, he

sought for allowing the writ petition.

4. Per contra, Sri H.S.Suhas, learned counsel

appearing for the respondent has submitted that

since the vendor of the petitioner has received the

entire compensation, therefore, the petitioner is not

entitled for allotment of site.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the writ papers.

6. Be that as it may. The BDA has passed a

resolution to allot a site in favour of the petitioner.

Pursuant to that has issued the allotment letter on

26.04.2019 vide Annexure-C for a sum of

Rs.15,98,700/-. At the request of the BDA the

petitioner has paid Rs.11,37,000/- and he has

submitted a representation for execution of the sale

deed. The representation dated 14.07.2021 has been

produced as Annexure-F, but so far the respondent

has not considered the same.

7. Under these circumstances, it is suffice for

this Court to direct the respondent - BDA to consider

the representation filed by the petitioner, in

accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, not

later than three months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order.

It is made clear that this Court has not

expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Sd/-

JUDGE Cm/-