Disposed

Sri Immadi Nijaguna Swamy, v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC24 Oct 2024WP/4322/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenged a property assessment under the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976 and a demand notice under the BBMP Act, 2020. The petitioner's counsel stated he would avail the One Time Settlement Scheme; the petition was disposed of with liberty to respondents to pursue the impugned demand if the scheme was not availed.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sri Immadi Nijaguna Swamy, Vs State of Karnataka — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:42799 WP No. 4322 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4322 OF 2024 (LB-TAX)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI IMMADI NIJAGUNA SWAMY, (WRONGLY SHOWN AS SRI IMMADI NEEJAGUNA SWAMY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS) S/O RAJASHEKARAIAH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/A 17, SRI NIJAGUNARA JANGAMMAMUTT SRI NIJAGUNARA ROAD 2^ND MAIN, 2^ND CROSS GAVIPURAM EXTENSION BENGALURU SOUTH-560019.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI.ABHAY RAJIV SHIVAM, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANTHOSH S. NAGARALE., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by ANAND N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶13

BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE N R SQUARE BANGALORE-560002 REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT REVENUE OFFICER BRUHAT BENGALURU MAHANAGARA PALIKE KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR SUB DIVISION

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:42799 WP No. 4322 of 2024

¶17

CORPORATION BUILDING, IST FLOOR J C ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 078.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT.SPOORTHI V., HCGP FOR R1;

¶20

SRI. K.B. MONESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24/01/2024 AT ANNEXURE-A TO THE WP PASSED BY THE R3. ii) QUASH THE FOLLOWING ORDERS AND DEMAND NOTICES ISSUED THE R3.SL. NO. - 1 ASSESSMENT YEAR - 2016-17ORDER NO. - ARO(KGN)/W-142/PR143/2020-21ORDER DATE - 15/07/2023 ANNEXURE-B DEMAND NOTICE NO. ARO(KGN)/W-142/PR-143/202021 DEMAND NOTICE DATE- 15/07/2023- ANNEXUREB1. AND ETC.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

The petitioner has called in question the Assessment under the provisions of Section 108 - A of the Karnataka Municipal Corporations Act, 1976

¶26

¶27

NC: 2024:KHC:42799 WP No. 4322 of 2024

¶28

and the Demand under Section 144 (15)(e) of the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike Act, 2020. This Court has permitted inspection of the property calling for a report and such report is now placed on record.

¶29

However, Sri Abhay Rajiv Shivam, the learned

¶30

counsel for the petitioner, submits that his instructions are that the petitioner will avail One Time Settlement Scheme and the petition may be disposed of. When queried on the consequences that should be if the petitioner fails to avail One Time Settlement Scheme, the learned counsel is categorical that in such event the respondents will be entitled to pursue the impugned demand.

¶31

Taking these submissions, the petition stands disposed of subject to all just exceptions in law.

¶32

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶33

SA ct:sr

Sri Immadi Nijaguna Swamy, v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sri Immadi Nijaguna Swamy, v. State of Karnataka

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

Sri. H. Hanumantha Vs Bruhath Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Srhi C K Subramanian Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Mr Omar Farook Vs the Commissioner

Mr K Girish Kumar Naidu Vs the Chief Commissioner of Bbmp

B Basavarajappa Vs Executive Officer Taluk Panchayath Shikaripura

Sri R Jagadish Naik Vs State of Karnataka