Allowed

Gurumurthy Basavraj Navalgundmath, v. Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporaotion

Karnataka HC6 Jun 2024WP/100405/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging rejection of an appeal against a municipal corporation order for delay. Court allowed the petition, condoned the delay in filing the appeal, and directed the appellate authority to hear the matter on merits, holding that litigants should not be punished for advocate's laxness.

What did the court decide?

Delay in filing the appeal against the Municipal Corporation order is condoned; the impugned order quashed; matter remanded to be heard on merits within three months.

Gurumurthy Basavraj Navalgundmath, Vs… — Municipal and Town Planning | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:7559 WP No. 100405 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 100405 OF 2017 (LB-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

GURUMURTHY BASAVRAJ NAVALGUNDMATH, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: VEERAPUR ONI,

¶7

NEAR BASVAN MANTAP, HUBLI-20.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. PRAKASH ANDANIMATH & SRI. KUSHAL V. BOLMAL, ADVOCATES)

¶10

AND:

¶11

HUBLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, HUBLI-20 BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶12

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, ZONEL OFFICE NO.11, HUBBALLI-DHARWAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION HUBBALLI.

¶13

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, ADV. FOR R1 & R2)

¶16

Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED:23.09.2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DHARWAD SITTING AT HUBBALLI, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-D.

¶18

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7559 WP No. 100405 of 2017

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner feeling aggrieved by the order passed

¶22

by the respondent-corporation under Section 321(3) of the Karnataka Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) preferred an appeal before the appellate authority. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal in 2012 assailing the order of confirmation passed under Section 321(3) of the Act, an application seeking condonation of delay is filed only in 2015. The learned Judge adopting hyper-technical approach has proceeded to reject the application and consequently, the appeal is dismissed.

¶23

Petitioner has constructed a residential house in

¶24

violation of the approved building plan and bye-laws. An appeal is preferred by the petitioner and since valuable rights in immovable properties are involved, in the interest of justice, this court is compelled to take a lenient view granting one more opportunity to the petitioner to prosecute the appeal on merits. Though the appeal is filed

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7559 WP No. 100405 of 2017

¶26

in 2012, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is filed in 2015. It is in this background, it was contested by the respondents contending that there is delay of 35 months in filing the application seeking condonation of delay. If there is laxness on the part of the advocate, the litigant/citizen cannot be punished. Therefore, the learned Judge was not justified in adopting a hyper-technical approach. Therefore, this court is of the opinion that, if delay is condoned and the appeal is adjudicated on merits, no prejudice will be caused to the respondent-corporation. This court granted an interim order of status-quo and the same is in operation since 2017. The respondent-corporation has not chosen to seek vacation of the interim order. Therefore, petitioner deserves one more opportunity to make out a case.

¶27

For the forgoing reasons, this court passes the

¶28

following:

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:7559 WP No. 100405 of 2017

¶30

ORDER

¶31

i) The writ petition is allowed.

¶32

ii) The order under challenge produced as per Annexure-D is quashed and set aside. Delay is condoned.

¶33

iii) The learned Judge shall hear the matter on merits and dispose of the appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶34

iv) Since the parties are represented by the respective counsels, they are directed to appear before the learned Judge on 09.07.2024.

¶35

Sd/JUDGE

¶36

MBS Ct-mck List No.: 1 Sl No.: 47

Gurumurthy Basavraj Navalgundmath, v. Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporaotion

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurumurthy Basavraj Navalgundmath, v. Hubli-Dharwad Municipal Corporaotion

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Yakhoob Hussaini Vs Election Officer

Dayanand Vs Belagavi

D.S.Mallaplur S/O. Singadeppa Vs State of Karnataka

Gururaj Narasimha Das Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Erappa S/O Channabasappa Naregal Vs Smt Sudha W/O Erappa Naregal

Manjur Ali Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer