Disposed

Mr. M R Seetharam v. Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Karnataka HC7 Nov 2024WP/12748/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitions by an owner and developer in a joint development dispute over property tax assessment and refusal to bifurcate Katha per their Area Sharing Agreement. Tax liabilities were settled via One Time Settlement; BBMP did not oppose bifurcation. Court directed the Assistant Revenue Officer to issue bifurcated Katha in terms of the agreement.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mr. M R Seetharam Vs Bruhath Bengaluru… — Municipal and Town Planning | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 12748 OF 2022 (LB-BMP)

¶7

C/W

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO. 4948 OF 2021 (LB-BMP)

¶9

IN WP NO. 12748/2022

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

MR. M R SEETHARAM S/O M S RAMAIAH AGED 66 YEARS R/AT GOKULA HOUSE GOKULA EXTENSION, MATHIKERE BENGALURU - 560 054.

¶12

…PETITIONER

¶13

Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

(BY SRI. G. KRISHNAMURTHY, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. G.K.BHAVANA.,ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE REP BY ITS CHIEF COMMISSIONER N R SQUARE

¶17

BENGALURU - 560 002.

¶18

JOINT COMMISSIONER

¶19

BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE YALAHANKA ZONE

¶20

BYATARAYANAPURA

¶21

¶22

NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶23

BENGALURU - 560 092.

¶24

ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE BYATARAYANAPURA SUB DIVISION YELAHANKA ZONE THANISADNRA WARD NO.6

¶25

BENGALURU - 560 092.

¶26

REGALIAA BUILDTECH AND SERVICES PVT LTD HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 301, SHALAKA, 3^RD FLOOR PLOT NO. 32, JUHU ROAD, NEAR SANTA CRUZ POLICE STATION

¶27

SANTA CRUZ (WEST) MUMBAI - 400 054.

¶28

HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MSR REGALIAA ELEMENTS MALL SITUATED AT NAGAVARA VILLAGE THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD KASABA HOBLI BENGALURU NORTH TALUK BENGALURU - 560077 REP BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTOR AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SRI ANUP SHYAM KARNANI.

¶29

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SATYANANDA B S.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. ASHOK G.V., ADVOCATE FOR R4)

¶30

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 10.10.2019 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN BBMP/J.C.(Y.S)/S.K.A (B.S.D.PR) 433/201718 AT ANNX-J; QUASH THE NOTICE DATED 11.10.2019

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶32

BEARING NO. BBMP.YV/BUV.P.R 360.17-18 ISSUED BY THE R-3 AT ANNX-K; DIRECT THE R-1, 2 AND 3 TO BIFURCATE THE KATHA BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND R-4 AND ISSUE SEPARATE KHATAS AS PER THE DIVISION IN THE SCHEDULE B AND C OF THE PROPERTIES.

¶33

IN WP NO. 4948/2021

¶34

BETWEEN:

¶35

REGALIAA BUILDTECH AND SERVICES PVT LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 AND AN EXISTING COMPANY GOVERNED BY THE COMPANIES ACT 2013 AND HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 301, SHALAKA 3^RD FLOOR, PLOT NO.32 JUHU ROAD, NEAR SANTA CRUZ POLICE STATION, SANTA CRUZ (WEST) MUMBAI-400 054 AND ALSO AN OFFICE AT MSR REGALIAA ELEMENTS MALL SITUATED AT NAGAVARA VILLAGE THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD, KASABA HOBLI, BENGALURU NORTH TALUKA BENGALURU -560077 KARNATAKA.

¶36

REPRESENTED BY ONE OF ITS DIRECTOR AND AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR ANUP SHYAM KARNANI

¶37

…PETITIONER

¶38

(BY SRI. ASHOK G V .,ADVOCATE)

¶39

¶40

NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶41

AND:

¶42

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 4^TH FLOOR VIKAS SOUDHA AMBEDKAR VEEDHI

¶43

BENGALURU-560 001.

¶44

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SUQRE, BENGALURU-560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶45

JOINT COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHA NAGARA PALIKE YALAHANKA ZONE BYATARAYANAPURA

¶46

BENGALURU-560092.

¶47

ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHA NAGARA PALIKE BYATARAYANAPURA SUB DIVISION YALAHANKA ZONE BENGALURU-560092.

¶48

SRI M R SEETHARAM S/O M S RAMAIAH AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDING AT GOKULA HOUSE GOKALA EXTENSION MATHIKERE, BENGALURU-560 054.

¶49

…RESPONDENTS

¶50

(BY SRI.RAHUL CARIAPPA., AGA FOR R1;

¶51

SRI. N.R. JAGADEESHWARA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4; R5 SERVED)

¶52

¶53

NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶54

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOQUASH ORDER DATED 10.10.2019 PASSED BY R-3 JOINT COMMISSIONER VIDE ANNX-H. (a) QUASH THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 11.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER R-4 DEMANDING THE PURPORTED SUM OF RS.2,47,29,597/- (RUPEES TWO CRORE FOURTY SEVEN LAKHS TWENTY NINE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY SEVEN) TOGETHER WITH INTEREST AND PENALTY FROM THE R-5 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE PAYMENT OF 60 PERCENT SHARE IS TO BE PAID BY THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNX-H. (b).DIRECT THE R-2 TO CREATE A SEPARATE KHATA IN ITS RECORDS FOR THE PROPERTY OWNED BY THE PETITIONER AS PER DETAILS GIVEN IN SCHEDULE PROPERTY; DIRECT THE R-2 TO ADJUST THE AMOUNT OF RS.37,41,709/(RUPEES THIRTY SEVEN LAKHS FORTY ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED NINE ONLY) PAID IN EXCESS OF PAYABLE TAX BY THE PETITIONER; DIRECT THE R-2 TO DETERMINE TAX AMOUNT PAYABLE BY THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY OWNED BY THE PETITIONER AS GIVEN IN SCHEDULE C PROPERTY.

¶55

THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶56

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶57

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶58

ORAL ORDER

¶59

These petitions are by the owner and the developer who have entered into a transaction for joint development of a certain immovable property. They claim the benefit of a sanctioned plan and a later occupancy certificate issued by the respondents. The present controversy is over assessment of property tax and the refusal to issue bifurcated Katha according to the registered Area Sharing Agreement dated 01-09-2017. This Court has permitted the petitioners to deposit certain amounts subject to outcome in this petition.

¶60

Sri G. Krishnamurthy, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner [ in W.P.No.12748/2022 ] without contest by Sri Jagadeeshwara N.R. and Sri.B.S. Satyananda, the learned counsels for the BBMP and its officials, submits that during the pendency of these petitions the petitioners have

¶61

NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶62

¶63

availed the benefit of One Time Settlement [ OTS ] Scheme and discharged all tax liabilities as of 31.03.2024 and the only issue that remains is whether the authorities can refuse to bifurcate the Katha based on the Area Sharing Agreement. The Senior counsel emphasizes that it is trite that the mutation of Katha cannot be brought into jeopardy because of the dispute over the property tax assessment.

¶64

Sri N.R. Jagadeeshwara and Sri B.S.

¶65

Satyananda, without proposing to controvert this assertion, submit that if a certified copy of this order is filed along with Area Sharing Agreement, the jurisdictional Assistant Revenue Officer will examine and issue Katha in terms thereof. These submissions indicate a closure of all disputes as of today and hence, the following:

¶66

¶67

NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶68

ORDER

¶69

[A] The petitions stand disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to file a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the Area Sharing Agreement with the Assistant Revenue Officer and calling upon the jurisdictional Assistant Revenue Officer to issue Katha to the petitioners in terms of such agreement.

¶70

[B] The petitioners will be at liberty to file a certified copy of this order and the Area Sharing Agreement within 15 [fifteen] days from the date of receipt of a certified copy thereof and the jurisdictional Assistant Revenue Officer is directed to issue, within the next four [4] weeks,

¶71

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:44999 WP No. 12748 of 2022 C/W WP No. 4948 of 2021

¶72

bifurcated Katha in favour of the petitioners in terms of the Area Sharing Agreement, and if there is justifiable reason to deny the same to inform the petitioners of such reason/s.

¶73

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶74

SA ct:sr

Mr. M R Seetharam v. Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mr. M R Seetharam v. Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shashikala Vs the Tahsildar

Smt. Umadevi. M Vs the State of Karnataka

Iffath Wasim Vs the Commissioner

Chetana Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ganesh D Vs the Commissioner

M/S Provident Welworth City Apartment Owners Association (Regd) Vs the State of Karnataka