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
NC: 2025:KHC:42333
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:42333
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:42333
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.
NC: 2025:KHC:42333
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
