M/S Sri Hari Enterprises, Vs the State of Karnataka

REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SMT. NAGAVENI W/O SRI HV CHIKKAGARIGAREDDY AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS R/AT HVR HOUSE, VAPASANDRA BEHIND MILK DAIRY, CHICKKABALLAPUR TOWN CHICKKABALLAPUR-561201.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. CHOWDAREDDY T. M., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA

¶13

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES MS BUILDING BENGALURU 560 001 ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.

¶16

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) NO.2, 2/1 AND 2/3 KALIDASA MARG 1^ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU- 560009.

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:26727 WP No. 12840 of 2026

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

THE SECRETARY KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) NO.2, 2/1 AND 2/3 KALIDASA MARG 1^ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU- 560009.

¶20

THE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE ENGINEER-2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) NO.2, 2/1 AND 2/3 KALIDASA MARG, 1ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU- 560009.

¶21

THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) NO.2, 2/1 AND 2/3 KALIDASA MARG 1^ST MAIN ROAD, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU- 560009.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI, AGA FOR R1 TO R3: SRI. GOPAL V BILAMANE, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED: 03.03.2026 FILED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING FOR IMMEDIATE EXECUTION OF SALE DEED IN RESPECT OF PLOT NO.44 OF CHICKKABALLAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA WHICH IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS SCHEDULE TO THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE NAME OF PETITIONER, COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED. 03.03.2026 WHICH IS PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-K WITHIN THE TIME BOUND TO BE FIXED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND ETC.

¶25

3 -

¶26

NC: 2026:KHC:26727 WP No. 12840 of 2026

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶29

ORAL ORDER

¶30

Learned AGA accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1 to

¶31

Sri Gopal V.Bilamane, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶32

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶33

“(i) ISSUE a writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction directing the respondents to consider representation dated; 03.03.2026 filed by the petitioner seeking for immediate execution of sale deed in respect of plot no.44 of Chickkaballapura industrial area which is more fully described as schedule to this writ petition in the name of petitioner, copy of representation dated 03.03.2026 which is produced at Annexure-K within the time bound to be fixed by this Hon'ble court in accordance with law to meet the ends of justice.

¶34

(ii) ISSUE any other writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶35

Petitioner claims that the schedule property had been

¶36

allotted to the petitioner in the year 1995 and

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:26727 WP No. 12840 of 2026

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

possession thereof was handed over in September 1995 followed by a lease-cum-sale agreement executed in favour of the petitioner on 27.12.2016.

¶41

The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite compliance with all his obligations in the lease-cumsale agreement, a final sale deed has not been executed in favour of the petitioner. As such, a representation was submitted by the petitioner on 03.03.2026, which is yet to be considered by the respondents.

¶42

Whenever any representation is submitted by a citizen, in this case an allottee to a statutory authority, the statutory authority is required to consider the same and pass necessary orders within a reasonable time, either accepting or rejecting the representation.

¶43

In the present case, representation has been made on 03.03.2026. For more than 3 months, the same is

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:26727 WP No. 12840 of 2026

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

pending, which is not a reasonable time. As such, I

¶47

pass the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

(i) Writ petition is allowed.

¶50

(ii) A mandamus is issued directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 03.03.2026 and pass necessary orders thereon within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶51

SD/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶52

CM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 6

M/S Sri Hari Enterprises, v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sri Hari Enterprises, v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

City Families Association (Regd) Vs State of Karnataka

Smt Architha Cv Vs State of Karnataka

Dr H N Anand Vs the Sub Registrar

M/S Hrs Electrical and Construction Vs the State of Karnataka

Parvathamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Rep by the Manager Acko General Insurance Ltd. Vs Jharana Magar