Disposed

Sri. B. Venkateswara Rao, v. Chairman and Managing Director

Telangana HC6 Dec 2023WP/19972/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 seeking mandamus for fixation of market rent and payment of arrears by BPCL. The Court directed the respondents to consider the petitioners' grievances within four weeks, provide a hearing, and pass appropriate orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider petitioners' grievance regarding rent fixation within four weeks, provide hearing opportunity, and pass appropriate orders.

Sri. B. Venkateswara Rao, Vs Chairman and Managing… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

l32s2l

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 19972 OF 2014

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sri. B. Venkateswara Rao, S/o- Late B. Narasimha Rao, age 49 years, Occ Business, Rl/o. Plot No. 7, Road No. 3, Kakatiya Nagar, Habsiguda, Hyderabad - 7

¶9

B. Sajjanamma, W/o Late B. Narsimha Rao Age 77 years Occ Household R/o - Plot No. 7, Road No. 3, Kakatiya Nagar, Habsiguda, Hyderabad - 7

¶10

...PETITIONERS

¶11

AND

¶12

Chairman AND Managing Director, [\rlls. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Bharat Bhavan, 4 and 6, Ballard Estate Currim Bhoy Road, Bellard Estate, lVlumbai - 400001 .

¶13

Executive Director (LPG), [vl/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Bharat Bhavan,4 and 6, Ballard Estate Currim Bhoy Road, Bellard Estate, Mumbai - 400001.

¶14

The Territory Manager (LPG), IV/S. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd-, HCL Post, APllC, l.D.A., Phase lll Cherlapalli, Hyderabad - 500051.

¶15

Ivl/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Regional LPG Manager, Ranganathan Garden OFF 1 1th main road Anna Nagar Chennai-400060.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of IvIANDAMUS, declaring the inaction of the respondents in not acting upon the representations made by the petitioners father as well as the legal notice sent through their advocate dt. 27-05-2014 seeking to fix tlre rents on the present market value for the lease property situated in Plot No.14,^'l 5 and 16 Sy. No. 79, 80, 85 and 86, Saheb Nagar, Kurd Revenue Village, Jahangir Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, and against to the principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to fix the rents on the present market value for the showroom and godown situated in Plot No. 14, 1 5 and 16 Sy. No. 79, 80, 85 and 86, Saheb Nagar, Kurd Revenue Village, Jahangir Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad and also direct the respondents to^pay the entire arrears of rent upto date to the petitioners.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BUJJIBABU DAVULURI Counsel for the Respondents: SRI O.MANOHER^REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.19972 OF 2014

¶20

ORDER

¶21

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

¶22

2. The petitioners approached this Court seeking the

¶23

relief as under:

¶24

"To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS, declaring the inaction of the respondents in not acting upon the representations made by the petitioners father as well as the legal notice sent through their advocate dt 27.05.2014 seeking to fix the rents on the present market value for the lease property situated in plot No. 14, 15 and 16 Sy.No.79, 80, 85 and 86, Saheb Nagar, Kurd Revenue Village, Jahangir Colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary, and against to the principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the respondents to fix the rents on the present market value for the showroom and godown situated in Plot No.14, 15 and 16 Sy.No. 79, BO, 85 and 86, Saheb Nagar, Kurd Revenue Village, Jahangir Colony, Va nastha lipura m, Hyder-abad and also direct the respondents to pay the entire arrears of rent upto date to the petitioners and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

¶25

¶26

3. The case of the petitioners in brief:

¶27

The 1't petitioner's father has taken the open land admeasuring 1500 square yards situated at plot No.14,15 & 16 in Sy.No.79,B0, 85 & 86, Saheb Nagar, Kurd Revenue Village, Jahangir colony, Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad vide lease dated L2.O1.1994 for a period of 15 years for establishment of LPG distributorship under the name and style of M/s. Bharadwajasa Agencies and constructed the godown and showroom for running the LpG distributorship. for constructing the said godown and showroom the petitioner had incurred huge expenditure, and he also obtained all necessary permissions from the competent authorities like HUDA, Municipal permission etc. Subsequently, as per the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.L.p (C) No.8755 of 2002, dated l5-O7-2O02 the said godown and showroom was handed over to the Bharat petroleum Corporation on 20.07.2002 and the 1st petitioner,s father died on 01.11.2013 leaving petitioner Nos.1 and 2 as legal heirs.

¶28

It is the specific case of petitioners that legal notice was issued to respondents herein on 27 .O5.ZOl4 . The petitioners made a specific request for fixation of fair rent regarding the

I t i II I I I I

land i.e., M/s. Bharadwajasa Agencies and since the subject go-down and showroom was handed over to the Bharat Petroleum Corporation on 20.07.2002.The 1st petitioner's late father had made repeated representations dated.08.06.2006, 18.11.2006, t2.02.2007, 25.06.2007, 30.10.2008, 18.06.2009 etc., to the respondents for fixation of rents and release of rental amounts to the subject premises. The respondents herein had however not considered the same till as on date and that the respondents have paid rent only for a period of six (06) months at the rate of Rs.8,500/- per month. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the pleas as^put forth by the petitioner through the legal notice dated 27.O5.2014 within a reasonable period.

¶34

Taking into consideration the said submissions made by the learned counsel^{appearingon behalf of} respondents, the^{Writ Petition is disposedof directing}

¶35

¶36

sl{ '

¶37

responderits to consider the grievance of petitioners as put forth in legal notice dated 27.05.2014 within a period of four (O4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and pass appropriate orders in accordance to !aw, in conformity with principles of natural justice by providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and duly communicate the decision to the petitioners. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, sha ll stand closed.

¶39

SD/-N. SRIHARI ASSTSTANTEqGT9TRAR //TRUE COPY// >/ SECTION OFFICER

¶40

¶41

One CC to SRI BUJJIBABU DAVULURI, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to SRI O.MANOHER REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 3- Two CD Copies PSK GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0611212023

ORDER

WP.No.19972 ot 2014

'SIATE
O.c
7
o
1\1<br>tr[<br>11
*
)ooa
I oESt'r 1

¶47

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶48

t,
Ltr

Sri. B. Venkateswara Rao, v. Chairman and Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. B. Venkateswara Rao, v. Chairman and Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Bhaskar Reddy Vs State of Telangana

M/s. C.P.LData Services (India) Private Ltd. Vs The Union of India

Chiraboina Laxmaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Sri R. Pratap Singh and another Vs Union of India and 2 others

Medhodist Degree Collee, Vs The Director and Commissioner of Collegiate Education

Sri Keerti Sai Reddy Yalala Vs The Union of India