Tumakur Urban Development Authority sought review of an order directing payment for additional occupied area. With the Division Bench having upheld that order in a writ appeal, the Court held review was not maintainable and disposed of the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:51279 RP No. 476 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD REVIEW PETITION NO. 476 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
TUMAKUR URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS COMMISSIONER, BELAGUMBA ROAD, TUMAKUR - 572102
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. T. P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
NC: 2024:KHC:51279 RP No. 476 of 2024
RESIDING AT SJR LADIES HOSTEL, AMARAJYOTHINAGAR KUNIGAL ROAD, TUMAKUR - 572105
NOW RESIDING AT NEAR RAVINDRA TOYOTA SHOWROOM, MELEKOTE, TUMKUR - 572102
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. R. SUBRAMANYA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. T. GOVINDARAJA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 PRAYING THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO REVIEW THE ORDER DATED 08.04.2024 IN W.P. NO. 8003/2020 AND RESTORE THE SAID WRIT PETITION FOR BEING HEARD AFRESH.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
The third respondent's writ petitions in
W.P.No.40/2024 c/w 8003/2020 are disposed of by this Court by the order dated 08.04.2024 directing the third respondent to pay price for the additional extent of 104.45 Sq. Mtrs at the rate of Rs.1,580/per Sq. Ft. The present petition is filed contending that (a) this Court must review the aforesaid order because the State Government has not accorded its approval for the decision to charge the second respondent a sum of Rs.1,580/- per Sq. Ft. for the additional area and (b) that the additional area would be a separate site in itself.
NC: 2024:KHC:51279 RP No. 476 of 2024
Mr. R. Subramanya respectively. However, the third respondent remains unrepresented.
It is rightly observed by learned Single Judge that the petitioner who has occupied the additional area cannot assert as a matter of right that he must not given the benefit of the additional area at the original price. When the additional area was occupied and was claimed by the petitioner, separate amount was required to be paid by the petitioner.
Learned Single Judge has granted three months' time to pay the amount. The impugned judgment and order of learned Single Judge is eminently just, legal and proper. No interference is called for.
NC: 2024:KHC:51279 RP No. 476 of 2024
Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
RB
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the order dated 08.04.2024 in W.P. No. 8003/2020 should be reviewed and the writ petition restored for fresh hearing.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Tumakur Urban Development Authority by its Commissioner
State of Karnataka by its Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development
Tumkur City Municipal Corporation, represented by its Commissioner
C.B. Narasimhaiah
B M Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
