BDA appealed a single judge's order directing it to allot an alternate site and pay Rs.2 lakhs compensation to an allottee who could not use her allotted plot since 2004. The Division Bench found no merit, declined to interfere with the compensation, and dismissed the writ appeal.
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:19312-DB WA No. 1035 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI WRIT APPEAL NO. 1035 OF 2022 (BDA)
BETWEEN:
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST, BENGALURU-560 020. REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI B.S. SACHIN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: High Court of Karnataka
SMT. VIMALA, W/O SRI H R NAGARAJ, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, NO.154, 11TH MAIN ROAD, MANJUNATH NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010.
(BY SRI GANAPATHI S SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)
…RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE DATED 19/07/2022, IN WP NO. 7086/2021, BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE APPEAL AND DISMISS THE SAID WRIT PETITION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, V KAMESWAR RAO J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
NC: 2024:KHC:19312-DB WA No. 1035 of 2022
JUDGMENT
I.A.No.1/2022 filed for condonation of delay of 43 days in
filling the appeal is allowed as condoned being satisfied by the reasons stated in the affidavit.
This appeal has been filed by the Bengaluru Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'BDA' for short) challenging the order of the Single Judge dated 19.07.2022 in W.P.No.7086/2021, whereby, learned Judge has allowed the petition by stating as under:
NC: 2024:KHC:19312-DB WA No. 1035 of 2022
in the name of the respondent. It was the case of the respondent that when he had gone to the property on 21.11.2004, he was informed that the erstwhile owner of the
said land had not surrendered the property and the same is under litigation. The respondent made a representation dated
15.05.2010 to the appellant herein. It is noted that the appellant had replied by endorsement dated 14.06.2010 that the issue is under consideration. However, no action was taken by the appellant, resulting in respondent issuing a legal notice dated 23.06.2019 followed by another notice dated 03.06.2020, which was not replied too. The learned Single Judge was of the view that the respondent having been allotted the site in the year 2004, till date he has not been able to use the property despite passage of 18 years. The learned Single Judge was of the view that there cannot any excuse for such a delay and the appellant would also be liable to compensate the respondent for the said delay.
for the appellant-BDA is that cost of Rs.2,00,000/- which had been granted in favour of the respondent herein is on the higher side.
respondent on the aforesaid property from the year 2004 till the date of filing of the petition.
In view of dismissal of the appeal, I.A.No.2/2022 filed for
stay does not survive for consideration.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
NR/-
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Single Judge's direction to BDA to allot an alternate site and pay Rs.2 lakhs compensation for failure to deliver an allotted site warranted interference in appeal.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bangalore Development Authority
Smt. Vimala
V Kameswar Rao
C M Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
