Just Dial Limited vs Karnataka Industrial Areas ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 539 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Just Dial Limited vs Karnataka Industrial Areas ... on 8 January, 2024

Author: M. Nagaprasanna

Bench: M. Nagaprasanna

                             1



Reserved on   : 05.01.2024
Pronounced on : 08.01.2024


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

                             BEFORE

         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

         WRIT PETITION No.23461 OF 2023 (GM-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

JUST DIAL LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 29
SRT STREET, CUNNINGHAM ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 052.
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
MR. NOORUDDIN M.,
                                             ... PETITIONER

(BY SMT. NALINI MAYEGOWDA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
    SRI. D.V.SHASHANK, ADVOCATE)

AND:

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
4TH AND 5TH FLOOR, KHANIJA BHAVAN
NO. 49, RACE COURSE ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
                                 2




EXECUTIVE MEMBER.
                                                       ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. B.B.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R)
     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25/09/2023 AND 11/10/2023 PASSED
BY   THE    RESPONDENT     IN  CASE   NO. KIADBHO/ALLOT/
20689/12154/2023-24 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A.

     THIS WRIT PETITION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS ON 05.01.2024, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-


                               ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order

dated 25-09-2023 whereby a plot in Plot No.12-P of Hi-Tech,

Defence and Aerospace Park (IT-Sector), Bangalore Urban District

made to the petitioner is sought to be cancelled.

2. Facts, in brief, adumbrated are as follows:-

The petitioner is a company and claims to be a subsidiary of

Reliance Retail Ventures Limited and is also Information Technology

Enabled Services Company. Its main activity is providing

information (Data) services. It is engaged in the business of IT

enabled services right from its inception. The petitioner makes an

application before the respondent/Karnataka Industrial Areas

Development Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board' for short)

for the purpose of setting up of a development centre for its

business. An approval was granted by the State High Level

Clearance Committee to the project of the petitioner and an

allotment letter dated 26-09-2014 was issued to the petitioner

alloting 15 acres of schedule property to the petitioner on lease for

a period of 99 years. The allotment letter also detailed the

premium and the rent to be paid qua the schedule property.

3. In furtherance of the said allotment letter, a possession

certificate was granted putting the petitioner in possession of Plot

No.12 measuring 60,632.41 sq.mts. which bears description in the

schedule to the petition. It is claimed that the petitioner is in

possession of the property since 20-11-2014 uninterruptedly. A

lease agreement also comes to be executed between the parties for

a premium of `37,45,63,614/- with a fixed annual rental for a

period of 99 years.

4. It is claimed that on 14-10-2015 the petitioner enters into

a Design Consultant Appointment Agreement with one M/s Synergy

Property Development Services Private Limited for development of

the project in the schedule property and building plans were all

approved. On 09-08-2016 the petitioner also makes an application

to the BSNL for a no objection to telephone connection in the

property. When things stood thus, on 05-10-2016 the petitioner

communicates to the Board enclosing a plan and also paid building

approval fee as was necessary in law. In terms of the time limit

prescribed in the lease deed, the petitioner had to complete the

construction in the property within three years from the date of its

allotment i.e., 26-09-2014. On 06-10-2017 the petitioner

represents detailing out several hurdles faced by it and submitting

explanation as to why construction could not be carried out due to

hurdles. The petitioner requests for phase-wise development plan

vis-à-vis transport and other allied infrastructure to be carried out

by the Board so that the petitioner would begin construction.

Therefore, till 06-10-2017 no construction took place.

5. Owing to the fact that the petitioner did not complete the

construction, a notice comes to be issued to the petitioner on

12-02-2018 invoking Section 34B of the Karnataka Industrial Areas

Development Act, 1996 ('the Act' for short) for violation of the

terms and conditions of lease agreement. The notice alleged that

the petitioner has not taken any effective steps to implement the

project even after a lapse of two years. After this notice was sent,

another notice dated 23-02-2018 was sent directing the petitioner

to appear before the Chief Executive Officer and Executive Member

along with details of effective steps taken to implement the project.

The petitioner then replied to the notice on 09-03-2018 requesting

the respondent to withdraw the notice dated 12-02-2018 and

submitted detailed reasons for non-adherence to the time line qua

the construction. Another notice on 28-09-2018 comes to be

issued calling upon the petitioner to appear and produce documents

of construction activities in the allotted area. Four years after the

said notice have passed by, during which period neither,

construction takes place, nor was there any communication from

the Board.

6. On 16-07-2022 the Board sends another notice granting

time of 30 days to reply and 90 days to remedy the breach. The

petitioner submits its reply on 19-08-2022 reiterating what was

contended earlier. The petitioner is then sent a notice on 21-08-

2023 again to appear before the Authorities and the petitioner

replied to the same on 06-09-2023 seeking extension of time to

appear before the Chief Executive Officer and Executive Member

for a period of 8 weeks. The hearing on 06-09-2023 could not take

place. When the petitioner failed to show any progress, another

notice was issued on 13-09-2023 to reply within a week. The

petitioner is said to have received the notice on 13-09-2023 and

sent a reply on 21-09-2023 reiterating the request made for

deferment of all proceedings for a period of 8 weeks. When the

petitioner failed to adhere to the directions issued in any of the

notices so issued, the Board passes an order on 25-09-2023

cancelling the allotment and directing the petitioner to hand over

possession within 10 days from the date of receipt of the said

notice. It is this order that has driven the petitioner to this Court in

the subject petition.

7. Heard Smt Nalini Mayegowda, learned senior counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Sri B.B.patil, learned counsel

appearing for the respondent.

8. The learned senior counsel representing the petitioner

would vehemently contend that non-implementation or adherence

to the time line qua the construction is for the reason that there

was no infrastructure put in place including roads for entry of any

vehicle into the area. This was clearly brought out in a

representation submitted by the petitioner way back in the year

2017 that if the Board were to provide infrastructure, the

construction would be completed. It is her submission that even

today there is no proper infrastructure for the petitioner to

complete the construction. It is further submitted that the

petitioner was not heard prior to passing of the order of cancellation

of allotment and direction to hand over possession of the property.

Therefore, the learned senior counsel would submit that there has

been violation of law qua Section 34 of the Act in passing the order

contrary to the interest of the petitioner. She would seek

quashment of entire proceedings and a timeline be fixed for

providing infrastructure, so that the petitioner would adhere to the

time line fixed in the year 2014.

9. The learned counsel for the respondent Sri B.B. Patil would

vehemently contend that, on the face of it, there is violation of the

terms and conditions of the agreement. The allotment was in terms

of a contract entered into between the petitioner and Board. The

allotment is Plot No.12-P in the Bangalore IT Park measuring 15

acres which comes to about 60,632.41 sq.mts. The condition was

that any failure to implement or fulfill any condition in Clause 6 of

the contract would lead to cancellation of the agreement under

Clause 23. The petitioner has breached the conditions of the

agreement. The project had to be set up on before 19-11-2017 in

terms of the agreement. No steps have been taken by the

petitioner to implement the project and it is just holding the land as

a real estate. He would refute the submission with regard to lack of

infrastructure by placing a comparison to the adjacent lands where

projects of Amazon or logos and E-Mudra have all been fully

implemented and about 600 to 1000 employees are working in

those projects. He would submit that if Amazon and E-Mudra who

are neighbouring allottees to the petitioner can come up with

projects in the time stipulated, nothing prevented the petitioner

doing so. Therefore, he would submit that it is deliberately not

done and there is breach of agreement. He would seek dismissal of

the petition.

10. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions

made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the

material on record.

11. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The

petitioner was allotted plot No.12-P of Bangalore IT Park for setting

up of an industry for establishment of IT/ITES-BPO and software

development centre. The lease is for a period of 99 years. Clauses

6, 7 and 8 of the allotment read as follows:

".... .... ....

6. On taking possession of land, you shall adhere to the time schedule indicated in the Annexure-A.

7. Your failure to take possession of land within 30 days from the date of payment of the premium shall result in cancellation of allotment and 10% of the amount

paid towards premium and E.M.D. shall stand forfeited.

8. The Board may accept voluntary surrender of plot subject to levy of penalty at 15% of the allotment cost paid by you.

.... .... ...."

On taking possession of land, the petitioner was to adhere to the

time schedule. Failure to take possession within 30 days would

result in cancellation of allotment and payment of 10% premium.

The conditions of allotment that was appended to the letter of

allotment read as follows:

"CONDITIONS OF ALLOTMENT

The time schedule prescribed for various activities subsequent to payment of premium.

1.(a) For taking over 30 days from the date of possession of land. payment of entire premium.

(b) For execution of 30 days from the date of Lease Agreement. receipt of possession certificate

(c) For commencement Construction should be of construction and commenced within nine completion of project months from the date of taking by commencing over possession and production production should be commenced:-

i) Within a period of three years after taking over possession in case of

MSME and large industries.

ii) Within a period of five years after taking over possession in cases of mega, ultra mega and super mega projects

iii) Promoters to seek extension of time in writing by giving valid reasons to be concerned investment approving committees viz., DLSWCC/SLSWCC/SHLCC/ Allotment Committee prior to the above mentioned periods.

2. On being satisfied that the land is not put to use for the purpose for which it was allotted, the Board will be free to re-enter upon and take possession of the whole or any part of the land which has not been put to proper use.

3. If necessary, the interest in this plot of land may be offered as security in order to obtain financial assistance from the Government or Corporate bodies like Life Insurance Corporation of India, Karnataka State Financial Corporation, Karnataka State Industrial Investment & Development Corporation, Trustees for Debenture Stock or Banks. However, prior permission of the Board shall be obtained for creating second and subsequent charges on the land."

(Emphasis added)

A possession certificate was issued on 20-11-2014 in terms of the

allotment. Later comes about a lease agreement. The lease

agreement contained time limit for commencement and completion

of construction work. Clause 6 deals with time limit for

commencement and completion and Clause 7 deals with extension

of time. They read as follows:

".... .... ....

6. Time limit for commencement and completion of construction work.

(i) The Lessee shall commence civil construction works within nine months from the date of handing over possession and after obtaining licence from the Chief Inspector of Factories and Boilers in Karnataka and/or from any other Authority as required under law.

(ii) The Lessee shall complete civil construction works, erect machineries and complete the project by commencing production within a period of three years from the date of handing over possession of the Schedule Property, that is from Twentieth day of November month two thousand Fourteen in case of MSME, large and five years for mega, ultra mega and super mega projects as defined in the industrial policy from time to time after obtaining necessary licences/clearances/approvals from the concerned from time to time.

(iii) After construction of buildings, the Lessee shall not make any major modifications/alterations/additions to the existing buildings/structures except with the prior approval of the Lessor in writing.

(iv) The Lessee shall maintain the Schedule Property and the buildings erected thereon in good repairs and conditions to the satisfaction of the Lessor.

(v) The Lessee, in respect of the Schedule Property, shall observe and conform to all rules, regulations and byelaws of the local Authority concerned or any other

statutory regulations in force relating to public health and sanitation.

7. EXTENSION OF TIME

(i) The Lessee shall seek extension of time in writing by giving valid reasons to the concerned investment approving committees viz., DLSWCC/SLSWCC/SHLCC through Lessor and the investment approval committees may at its discretion extend the time for completion of civil construction works, erection of machineries and commencement of production for a further period of:

(a) One year subject to the Lessee paying penalty of 2% of allotment cost.

(b) Subsequent extension of another one year subject to the Lessee paying penalty of 5% of allotment cost.

ii) No further extension beyond two years will be allowed."

(Emphasis added)

The lessee had to complete entire project at an outer limit of nine

months and extension was only for two years. It was indicated that

extension beyond two years would not be allowed. The petitioner

did not complete the construction/project within two years. It

appears that the petitioner enters into a design consultancy service

agreement with M/s Synergy Property Development Services

Private Limited on 14-10-2015. That remained only on paper. This

led the Board to issue first notice on 12-02-2018 which reads as

follows:

"M/s Just Dial Limited, No.29, Cunningham Road, SRT Street, Bengaluru - 560 052.

Sir,

Notice Under Clause-14 of the lease-cum-sale agreement (Section34-B of the KIAD Act, 1966)

Sub: Violation of terms and conditions of lease-cum-

sale agreement dt:19/10/2015 in respect of 60632.41 Sqmtrs of land in Plot No.12-P of Hi-tech Defence and Aero Space Park(IT Sector) Bengaluru(R)District.

Ref: 1. Lease-cum-sale agreement executed by your with the Board on 19/10/2015.

2. Report dt.16/11/2017 of DO & EE, KIADB Zonal Office, Bengaluru

********

You were allotted an extent of 60632.41Sqmtrs of land in Plot No.12-P of Hi-tech Defence and Aero Space Park(IT Sector) Bengaluru Rural District for establish and industry for "IT/ITES.BPO & Software Development Center". As per the terms and conditions of the lease-cum- sale agreement executed by you with the Board on 19/10/2015, you were expected to implement the project on the plot allotted on or before 19/11/2016.

In spite of the time frame prescribed in the lease-cum-sale agreement, you have failed to implement the project and utilize the land for the purpose for which it is leased even after lapses of more than 2 years from the date of execute of lease- cum-sale agreement. The DO & EE-3, KIADB Zonal Office, Bengaluru vide report dt:16/11/2017 has reported that the plot is vacant and the allottee has

not taken any effective steps to implement the project and not submitted the building plan for approval and thereby committed, the breaches of the conditions of the lease-cum-sale agreement.

Your failure to utilize the land and establish the proposed industry is contrary to the objective of allotment as well as the objective of the KIAD Act- 1966, namely Systematic and Rapid Industrial Growth this act on your part has also resulted in deprivation of opportunity to other entrepreneurs seeking allotment of land for establishing Industry.

You have failed to utilize the land for the purposed for which it is leased. Even after the lapse of more than 2 years from the date of execution of the lease-cum-sale agreement, i.e., on 19/10/2015, Section 34-B of KIAD Act, Read with Clause-14 of the lease-cum-sale agreement stipulates that the KIADB shall be entitled to determine the lease and resume the possession of whole of the land or any part thereof for violate on of terms and conditions prescribed in the lease-cum-sale agreement executed with the Board.

In view of the above, you are called upon to remedy the specific breaches noted here within a period of 90 days from the date of issue of this notice failing which further steps will be taken to terminate the lease and resume the possession of land by the Board for Violation of terms and conditions of agreement.

Please note that if no reply is received with 30 days from the date of this notice, it will be presumed that you have no genuine reason to who cause and further action in terms of the lease-cum-sale agreement will be taken.

Yours faithfully, Sd/-

Secretary-1."

(Emphasis added)

The petitioner submits its reply that there is no proper

infrastructure and it is committed to build its software development

centre which would not only create jobs but also develop IT

software infrastructure of the State. The request in the reply was

to revoke the notice dated 12-12-2018 and grant 4 years of

extension to complete the work. Another notice was issued on

23-02-2018 which reads as follows:

"M/s Just Dail Limited, No. 29, Cunningham Road, SRT Street, Bengaluru - 560 052.

Sir,

Sub: Notice under section 34 (B) (1) of KIADB Act 1966- Violation of terms and conditions of allotment of land in respect of 60632.41 sq.mtrs. of land at Plot No.12-P of Hitech Defence and Aero Space Park (IT Sector) Bengaluru(R)District.

Ref: 1. Notice U/s 34 (B) vide No:KIADB/HO/ Allot/20689/Secy-1/17499/2017-18 Date:12- 02-2018.

*******

With reference to the notice cited under reference above, you are requested to make it convenient to appear before the Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member in his chamber at the following address on 13th April 2018 at 11.00 A.M. along with the details of the effective steps taken by you, if any, to implement the project and to utilize the

land for the purpose for which it is allotted at the following venue.

"Khanija Bhavan", East Wing, No.49, 4th Floor, Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001."

(Emphasis added)

The petitioner was directed to appear before the Chief Executive

Officer and divulge the details of steps taken for construction.

Though this was served, it appears the petitioner did not appear.

Four years passed by. Even if it is construed that there is tacit

acceptance of four years time by the Board, even as on today there

is no development in the plot allotted to the petitioner. This is an

admitted fact. It is then after 4 years on 16-07-2022 another notice

comes to be issued indicating that even after lapse of 7½ years no

development in the project has taken place. The notice reads as

follows:

":: NOTICE UNDER SECTION 34-B (1) OF KIAD ACT 1966::

Sub: Violation of terms and conditions of Lease Deed dtd: 19.10.2015 executed by you with the Board in respect of Plot No. 12-P measuring 60632.41 Sq mtrs. of land at Hi- tech, Defence & Aerospace Park (IT Sector), Bengaluru

Ref: 1. Lease Deed dated 19-10-2015.

2. Report did 01-06-2022 of Executive Engineer-3. KIADB Zonal Office, Bengaluru.

******

With reference to the above subject, you were allotted an extent of 60632.41 sq.mtrs land in Plot No. 12-P at Hi-tech, Defence & Aerospace Park (IT Sector), Bengaluru vide allotment letter dtd: 26-09-2014 for setting up of a unit for "IT/ITES- BPO & Software Development Centre" Possession of the said land has been handed over to you on 20.11.2014. Lease Deed has been executed on 19-10-2015 As per the clause 6(ii) of lease deed you were expected to implement the project, on or before 19-11-2017.

The Executive Engineer-3, KIADB Zonal Office, Bengaluru vide report dtd: 01.06 2022 has informed that, the plot is physically vacant

In spite of the time frame prescribed in the lease deed you have failed to take effective steps to complete the implementation of the project & utilize the land for the purpose for which it is leased even after lapse of 7 ½ years from the date of possession. It is reported that, the plot is physically vacant, project is not Implemented and thereby committed the breaches of the lease deed

Your failure to utilize the land to establish the proposed industry is contrary to the object of allotment as well as the objects of the KIAD Act, 1966, namely systematic and rapid industrial growth. This act on your part has also resulted in deprivation of opportunity to other entrepreneurs seeking allotment of land for establishing industry.

You have failed to utilize the land for the purpose for which it is leased, even after more than 7 ½ years from the date of handing over of possession. Section 34-B of KIAD Act read with Clause 23 of the lease deed stipulates that "It shall be open to the Lessor during the currency of the lease to take possession of the allotted plot together with factory and other buildings and fixtures located for any violation of any of the conditions of this deed or the

terms and conditions of allotment after following the provisions contained in the KIAD Act, 1966.

In view of the above, you are called upon the remedy the specific breaches noted herewith within a period of 90 days from the date of issue of this notice failing which further steps will be taken to terminate the lease and resume the possession of land by the Board for violation of terms and conditions of agreement.

Please note that if no reply is received within 30 days from the date of this notice, it will be presumed that you have no genuine reason to show-cause and further action in terms of the lease cum sale agreement will be taken.

Yours faithfully.

Sd/-

Joint Director"

(Emphasis added)

This was replied to by the petitioner contending that there was no

infrastructure. The reply dated 19-08-2022 reads as follows:

"19th August, 2022

The Joint Director, Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, #49,4th & 5th Floor, 'East Wing', Khanija Bhavan, Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001.

Sir,

Subject: Reply to your notice dated July 16, 2022, under Section 34-B (1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.

Ref: (1) Notice dated July 16, 2022, bearing No. KIADB/ HO/ Allot/ 20689/7059/2022-23.

(2) Letter addressed by Just Dial Limited to the Secretary-1, Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, dated March 09, 2018 & 5th October 2018.

1. As you are aware, we Just Dial Limited ("Justdial" or "the Company") are the lessee of Plot No.12-P (Non- Corner) at the Hi-Tech, Defence and Aerospace Park (IT Sector), Bengaluru ("leasehold property") vide a lease agreement dated October 19, 2015, between the Company and Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board ("KIADB"). Be notified that the company has acquired the aforementioned leasehold property on lease for a period of 99 years commencing from October 19, 2015.

2. Be notified that our company in response to your notice dated February 12, 2018, bearing No. KIADB/HO/Allot/20689/Secy-117499/2017-18, vide a letter dated March 09, 2018, communicated its commitment to build the software development center within a period of 48 months. It was also communicated that the company's investment was predominantly considering the world-class amenities transport facilities promised by KIADB. Further, it was also communicated that the company sought for an extension of time primarily owing to the lack of transportation facilities and as such the lack of basic amenities at the Hi-Tech, Defence, and Aerospace Park. In view of the aforementioned, the company called upon your good offices to revoke the notice dated February 12, 2018, bearing No. KIADB/HO/Allot/20689/Secy-117499/2017-18 and grant the company a minimum of 48 months for completion of construction work.

3. As things stood thus, we are appalled to have received the notice dated July 16, 2022, bearing No. KIADB/ HO/ Allot/ 20689 /7059/2022-23 issued by your good office in connection to the aforementioned leasehold property. Be notified due to certain circumstances such as the

pandemic, economic slowdown, etc., as is evident for the past couple of years being faced not only by our company but by the world at large has certainly created hindrances in executing the plans as against originally committed.

4 Be notified that our company on numerous occasions Earlier vide letters dated April 13, 2016, July 11, 2016, and October 06, 2017, has communicated to your good offices the various constraints and difficulties faced by the company in the execution of the infrastructural developments at the leasehold property. Whilst, we are clear about our commitment and are working towards achieving it. It is imperative to note that we are still recovering from the aftermath of COVID-19 and recovering at a much faster pace comparatively.

5. Be notified that there is no deliberate attempt by the company to delay the project on our part except for the reasons mentioned above which are definitely not within our control despite of commitment & conviction nonetheless we hereby express our commitment & adherence to the terms of the lease agreement as executed & the communications addressed to your good office so far. Furthermore, we wish to bring to your notice that our company has now been a part of Reliance group. Given this tie-up, we definitely foresee the boost that project may have and the benefit to the overall development of IT/software centre including that of State.

6. We humbly request your good offices to accommodate us further and grant us an extension till the year 2025 without levying any penalty. This generous step from your good offices would definitely help us in and/or further strengthen us in executing our plans on the leasehold land allotted to us.

In view of the aforesaid, we pray to your good offices to revoke your notice dated 16TH July 2022 bearing No. KIADB/ HO/ Allot/ 20689 /7059/2022-23 and grant us the extension as prayed by the company.

We look forward for your kind cooperation in this regard."

(Emphasis added)

Extension was sought up to 2025 for development without

imposition of any penalty. The Board again issues a notice on

21-08-2023 for appearance. It reads as follows:

"No: KIADE/HO/Allot/20689/9638/2023-24 Date: 21.08.2023.

R.P.A.D

M/s. Just Dial Pvt. Ltd., No. 29, S.R.T. Street, Cunningham Road, Bengaluru-560 052.

Sir,

Notice Under Section 34-B(3) of KIAD Act 1966

Sub: Violation of terms & conditions of lease deed dtd 26.09.2014 and deed of rectification did 28.01.2016 in respect of 60632:41 Sq.Mtrs, of land situated in Plot No. 12-P at Hi-Tech, Delence & Aerospace Park (IT Sector), Bengaluru.

-o0o-

Please make it convenient to appear before the Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member, In his chamber on 8th September 2023 at 11.00 AM on the subject matter, along with the details of the effective steps taken by you, if any, to

implement the project and to utilize the land for the purpose for which it is allotted at the following venue.

Venue Detalls:

"Khanija Bhavan"

No.49, 4th Floor, East Wing, Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001.

This letter is issued with the prior approval of Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member."

The respondent submits a representation to accommodate 8 weeks

time to comply with the notice. The representation dated

07-09-2023 reads as follows:

"06th September 2023

Assistant Secretary, Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, #49,4th & 5th Floor, 'East Wing', Khanija Bhavan, Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001.

Ref: Your Notice dated 21.08.2023 bearing No. KIADB/HO/ Allot/20689/9638/2023-24.

Subject: Reply to your notice dated 21.08.2023, under Section 34-B (3) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966.

Sir,

This is with reference to your Notice under Section 34 B (3) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 dated 21.08.2023 bearing No. KIADB/HO/ Allot/20689/9638/2023-24, wherein you have instructed us to appear before the Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member in his chamber on 08 September, 2023 at 11 am.

We would like to inform you that our officials, who were likely to attend the upcoming meeting with the CEO and Executive Officer of your good office on 8th September 2023 at 11 a.m, will, unfortunately, be unable to attend due to some personal difficulties and also that fact some of an official is currently our of the country. This situation as such makes it practically difficult for officials to prepare adequately & and present our case for the meeting.

We humbly request your good offices to accommodate us further and deferment of the upcoming meeting schedule for a period of approximately 8 (eight) weeks, to comply with your notice. The request for deferment is purely on account of reasons beyond the control of the parties and the same is neither intentional nor deliberate but for the reasons as stated above. In view of the aforesaid, we pray to your good offices to grant us the deferment as prayed by the company.

We look forward for your kind cooperation in this regard."

(Emphasis added)

Again the Board issues another notice on 13-09-2023. It reads as

follows:

"No: KIADB/HO/Allot/20689/109451/2023-24 Date: 13.09.2023

R.P.A.D

M/s. Just Dial Pvt. Ltd., No. 29, S.R.T. Street, Cunningham Road, Bengaluru 560 052.

Sir,

Notice Under Section 34-B(3) of KIAD Act 1966

Sub: Violation of terms & conditions of lease deed dtd 26.09.2014 and deed of rectification did 28.01.2016 in respect of 60632.41 Sq.Mtrs. of land situated in Plot No. 12-P at Hi-Tech, Defence & Aerospace Park (IT Sector), Bengaluru

Ref: This office letter No: KIADB/HO/Allot/ 20689/9638/2023-24, dated 21.08.2023.

-o0o-

Please make it convenient to appear before the Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member, in his chamber on 22nd September 2023 at 11.00 AM on the subject matter, along with the details of the effective steps taken by you, if any, to implement the project and to utilize the land for the purpose for which it is allotted at the following venue.

Venue Details:

"Khanija Bhavan"

No.49, 4th Floor, East Wing, Race Course Road, Bengaluru-560 001.

This letter is issued with the prior approval of Chief Executive Officer & Executive Member."

It is after receipt of these notices, it appears on 10-10-2023, a

service agreement is entered into with one M/s Maruthi Enterprises

to provide service to the plot/construction of pre-cast compound

wall, earth work excavation etc. What would unmistakably emerge

from the agreement is admission on the part of the petitioner that

for about 9 years from allotment of the plot not an inch of

development has taken place as the earth work excavation is given

only on 10-10-2023 to escape the rigour of the notice.

Photographs are produced to demonstrate that work has begun in

the year 2023 which ought to have been completed in the year

2017. The Board not acceding to the request made, went on to pass

the impugned order on 25-09-2023 which reads as follows:

"DzÉñÀ

¸ÀASÉå:PÀ.PÉÊ.¥Àæ.ªÀÄA/PÉÃA.PÀ./ºÀAaPÉ/20689/12154/2023-24, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 25.09.2023.

M/s. Just Dial Ltd., PÀA¥À¤AiÀÄÄ ºÉÊ-mÉPï, r¥sÉ£ïì & KgÉÆøÉàÃ¸ï ¥ÁPïð (Ln ¸ÉPÀÖgï), ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ E°è gÀÆ.445.08 PÉÆÃn §AqÀªÁ¼À ºÀÆrPÉ ªÀiÁr ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 20991 d£ÀjUÉ GzÉÆåÃUÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀ°à¸ÀĪÀÅzÁV w½¹ 2010£Éà ¸Á°£À°è AiÉÆÃd£É C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ¥ÀqÉ¢zÀÄÝ, 2014£Éà ¸Á°£À°è ¤ªÉñÀ£À ¸ÀASÉå: 12- P gÀ°è 15.00JPÀgÉ «¹ÛÃtðzÀ d«Ää£À ºÀAaPÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸Áé¢üãÀ ¥ÀqÉ¢gÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

DzÀgÉ, ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¸Áé¢Ã£À ¥ÀvÀæ ¤Ãr ¸ÀĪÀiÁgÀÄ 8 ªÀµÀð 10 wAUÀ¼ÀÄUÀ¼ÄÀ PÀ¼É¢zÀÝgÀÆ PÀA¥À¤AiÀÄÄ d«Ää£À°è AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß C£ÀĵÁ×£ÀUÉƽ¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è, C£ÀĵÁ×£ÀUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ¸ÀPÁgÁvÀäPÀ PÀæªÀÄUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆArgÀĪÀÅ¢®è ºÁUÀÆ AiÉÆÃd£É C£ÀĪÉÆÃzÀ£É ¥ÀqÉAiÀÄĪÀ CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ°è ¸À°è¸À¯ÁzÀ ¨sÀgÀªÀ¸ÉAiÀÄAvÉ §AqÀªÁ¼À ºÀÆrPÉAiÀÄÆ ªÀiÁrgÀĪÀÅ¢®è ªÀÄvÀÄÛ GzÉÆåÃUÀ CªÀPÁ±ÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀºÀ PÀ°à¹gÀĪÀÅ¢®è.

DzÀÄzÀjAzÀ, PÉLJr PÁ¬ÄzÉ 1966gÀ PÀ®A 34-©(3) ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 34(4) gÀrAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄAqÀ½AiÀÄÄ ¥ÀævÁåAiÉÆÃf¹gÀĪÀ C¢üPÁgÀªÀ£ÀÄß ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¹, M/s. Just Dial Ltd., EªÀjUÉ ºÉÊ-mÉPï, r¥sÉ£ïì & KgÉÆøÉàÃ¸ï ¥ÁPïð(Ln ¸ÉPÀÖgï), ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ E°è£À ¤ªÉñÀ£À ¸ÀASÉå:12- P gÀ°è ºÀAaPÉ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁzÀ 60632.41 ZÀ.«ÄÃ.«¹ÛÃtðzÀ d«Ää£À ºÀAaPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ gÀzÀÄÝUÉƽ¸À¯ÁVzÉ.

M/s. Just Dial Ltd., PÀA¥À¤AiÀÄÄ ¤ªÉñÀ£À ¸ÀASÉå:12-P gÀ°è£À ¸Áé¢üãÀªÀ£ÄÀ ß ¢£ÁAPÀ:24.10.2023 gÉƼÀUÁV PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ-3, PÉLJr©, ªÀ®AiÀÄ PÀbÉÃj, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ EªÀjUÉ ªÀÄgÀĪÀ»¹PÉÆqÀ®Ä DzÉò¹zÉ.

MAzÀÄ ªÉÃ¼É PÀA¥À¤AiÀÄÄ ªÉÄîÌAqÀ ¤ªÉñÀ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¢£ÁAPÀ:24.10.2023 gÉƼÀUÁV ªÀÄAqÀ½UÉ ªÀÄgÀ½ ¸À»¹PÉÆqÀ¢zÀÝgÉ PÉLJr PÁAiÉÄÝ 1966gÀ PÀ®A 34-©(5) gÀrAiÀÄ°è

G¢ÝªÉÄzÁgÀgÀ C£ÀÄ¥À¹ÜwAiÀÄ°è ªÀĺÀdgï ªÀiÁr ¤ªÉñÀ£ÀzÀ ¸Áé¢üãÀªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAqÀ½UÉ »A¥ÀqÉAiÀÄ®Ä PÁAiÀÄð¥Á®PÀ C©üAiÀÄAvÀgÀgÀÄ-3, PÉLJr©, ªÀ®AiÀÄ PÀbÉÃj, ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ EªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¹zÉ.

F DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ºÀAaPÉzÁgÀjUÉ £ÉÆÃAzÁ¬ÄvÀ CAZÉ ¹éPÀÈw (RPAD)ªÀÄÄSÁAvÀgÀ gÀªÁ¤¸ÀĪÀÅzÀÄ.

F DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß EAzÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ:25.09.2023 gÀAzÀÄ ºÉÆgÀr¸À¯ÁVzÉ.

¸À»/- 25/9/23 ¢£ÁAPÀ:25.09.2023 qÁ,JA.ªÀĺÉñï, ¨sÁ.D.¸ÉÃ., ¸ÀܼÀ: ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ. ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÁðºÀuÁ¢üPÁj ºÁUÀÆ PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÁðºÀPÀ ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀågÀÄ."

12. The submission of the learned senior counsel is that

orders are not reasoned. I fail to understand what reason can be

given in a case where there is blatant breach of agreement. The

photographs are appended by the petitioner and when there is

admission that it has begun to construct or excavate the earth only

on 10-10-2023 what other reason need be given to the petitioner is

ununderstandable, as it is a clear case where admitted facts and

documents would reveal that the petitioner is in breach of the

agreement not 2 years, 4 years or 6 years, but 9 years have passed

by as on today and no development in the project has taken place.

13. The submission that there is no infrastructure at all for

the petitioner for development the property is belied by the

documents produced by the respondent. The other two entities

which were allotted the land along with the petitioner were E-Mudra

Digital Campus and Amazon Logos. Photographs are appended to

the statement of objections. The plot allotted to the petitioner looks

barren with no construction and only shrubs are grown. The plot

next to the petitioner is E-Mudra which is fully developed and next

to it is Amazon Logos again fully developed. The development in

fact, in terms of photographs of the other two, is to international

standards. Therefore, the bogey that there is no infrastructure for

even vehicles to enter is a ruse to get over the order passed.

14. Reliance is placed on several judgments rendered by the

co-ordinate Bench with regard to orders passed being unreasoned.

Those are cases which are distinguishable on facts without much

ado. The case at hand depicts palpable and demonstrable breach of

agreement for not undertaking any development for close to 9

years. Therefore, no fault can be found in the action taken by the

Board.

15. In the result, the petition lacking in merit deserves to be

rejected. It is accordingly rejected.

Sd/-

JUDGE

bkp CT:SS