Partly allowed

B. M. Srinivasaiah Educational Trust v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC20 Dec 2023WP/25467/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka quashed a demand order for rent arrears against educational trusts, directing the authority to issue a fresh demand and provide an opportunity for response. The court also clarified that lease expiry would not bar eligibility for lease renewal.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the order dated 01.02.2018; directed respondent to issue fresh demand and give opportunity for response.

B. M. Srinivasaiah Educational Trust Vs the State of… — Landlord and Tenant | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:46932 WP No. 25467 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 25467 OF 2018 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

B. M. SRINIVASAIAH EDUCATIONAL TRUST A REGISTERED TRUST HAVING ITS OFFICE AT BULL TEMPLE ROAD,

¶8

BENGALURU-560 004,

¶9

REPRESENTED BY ITS DONOR TRUSTEE,

¶10

SMT. RAGINI NARAYAN.

¶11

B. M. S. HOSPITAL TRUST HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT SY. NO. 618, MALLIKARJUNA SWAMY TEMPLE STREET, N.R. COLONY, BENGALURU-560 019, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SRI. HEMANT S. KUMAR.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶14

(BY SRI. H. SRINIVAS RAO.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY.

¶17

HINDU RELIGIOUS & CHARITABLE ENDOWMENTS 1ST MAIN ROAD, CHAMARAJPET, BENGALURU-560 018, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)

¶20

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:46932 WP No. 25467 of 2018

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.02.2018 PASSED BY R-1 VIDE ANENX-H; QUASH THE ORDER DATED 24.05.2018 PASSED BY R-2 VIDE ANNEX-G AND ETC.,

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard Sri. Badri Vishal, learned counsel appearing for

¶25

the petitioners, Smt. Rashmi Patel, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri. A. G. Gururaja, learned counsel appearing for the impleading applicant in I.A.No.1/2020.

¶26

The learned counsel for petitioners submits that Annexure-H, the proceedings of the Government dated 01.02.2018 consists of two components. One is with regard to demand of Rs.5,11,17,00/- and another one is with regard to the expiry of the term of the lease. As regards the expiry of the term of the lease is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would seek extension of lease. With regard to

¶27

the demand made for payment of Rs.5,11,17,00/-, he

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC:46932 WP No. 25467 of 2018

¶30

would submit that respondent No.2 be directed to issue fresh demand and provide an opportunity to the petitioners to putforth their response thereof and thereafter, to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶31

The learned High Court Government Pleader submits that if given some time, fresh demand with regard to the arrears of rent would be issued and an opportunity be provided to the petitioners for his say.

¶32

Submissions taken on record.

¶33

Order dated 01.02.2018 passed by respondent

¶34

No.1 as per Annexure-H is quashed. Petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent-authority to issue

¶35

fresh demand with regard to the arrears of rent, if any, and after giving sufficient opportunity to the petitioners, to file their response, shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC:46932 WP No. 25467 of 2018

¶38

It is also made clear that expiry of lease shall not come in the way of the petitioners seeking extension or

¶39

renewal of the lease, if the petitioners is otherwise eligible for extension of lease.

¶40

Sd/JUDGE

¶41

PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

B. M. Srinivasaiah Educational Trust v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. M. Srinivasaiah Educational Trust v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Syed Basheer Ahmed Malik Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Ashraf Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Mr Y B Shamanna Vs the Authorized Officer

Sri. B. M. Yogesh Vs State of Karnataka

Sri M Purushotham Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Sumathi Vs Sri M Bakthavatsala