Writ Petition No. 24861 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 24861 OF 2024 (BDA) BETWEEN: SMT.RAJI GEORGE W/O J GEORGE MATHEW, AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, RESIDENT OF CHACKO HOMES, THE ALWAYE FELLOWSHIP HOUSE, U C COLLEGE POST, ALUVA - 683 102, KERALA STATE. REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI S GIRIDHAR, S/O LATE SRI A N SESHADRI, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO. 5, GANAPATHI APARTMENTS, LAKSHMI ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 027.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. VIJAY A M.,ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka …PETITIONER 1. THE BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER) T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. 2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY -4 BANGALORE DEVELOMENT AUTHORITY, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 T CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 020. (BY SRI. SACHIN B S.,ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 01.04.2024 ISSUED BY THE R-2 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO EXECUTE THE REGISTERED ABSOLUTE SALE DEED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER, REPRESENTED BY HER PA HOLDERS SRI. S. GIRIDHAR OR SMT. VANDANA RAO JAISINGH IN RESPECT OF THE PETITION SCHEDULE PROPERTY. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL ORDER Petitioner is before this Court seeking following reliefs; "(a) the Issue Writ of Certiorari quashing endorsement dated 01.04.2024 bearing No. ¨ÉA D ¥Áæ : G PÁ-4 24:2023-24 issued by the 2nd Respondent, produced as Annexure 'A' and consequently direct the Respondents to execute the registered Absolute Sale Deed the Petitioner, the name of represented by her PA Holders Sri S. Giridhar or Smt. Vandana Rao Jaisingh, in respect of the Petition Schedule property; in (b) Issue such other Writ, Order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the interest of justice and equity". - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 2. Case of the petitioner is that she is the wife of original allottee namely Sri. J George Mathew, who had been allotted a residential flat bearing No.799 (D3 FFA), 1st Floor, "D" Block, BDA Flats, 2nd cross Neelasandra Main Road, Austin Town, Bengaluru, in terms of letter of allotment dated 22.07.1975. It appears that the said J George Mathew had executed power of attorney in favour of two persons namely C.L.K Rao and Sri. S Nagaraj authorizing them to obtain the absolute deed of sale from respondent -BDA on his behalf. That said C.L.K. Rao passed away. After his demise, Sri.S.Nagaraj pursued the matter requesting the respondent-BDA to execute deed of sale in favour of original allottee- J George Mathew. That in the meanwhile, said J Gorge Mathew stated to have passed away so also said S.Nagaraj. Thus, original allottee and his agents are no more. 3. That petitioner being the wife of said J George Mathew claiming to have succeeded to the interest of J George Mathew in respect of the aforesaid flat, has now executed a registered power of attorney on 24.05.2022 authorizing the present attorney namely, S.Giridhar and his niece Smt.Vandana - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 Rao Jaisingh to obtain deed of sale and other requisite conveyance from respondent -BDA in the name of petitioner. 4. That the petitioner had earlier approached this
Decision
Court in W.P.No.5075/2021 which was disposed of directing the respondent-BDA to execute deed of sale within three months. That non-compliance of the same, has resulted in initiation of contempt petition in CCC No.164/2022. The contempt Court while disposing of the matter directed the petitioner herein to furnish the necessary documents as requisitioned by the respondent -BDA upon assurance made by the respondent - BDA that the same would be complied with within a period of four weeks from the said date. Taking said submission on record, the contempt proceedings were dropped. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the said order petitioner had furnished all the documents as requisitioned by the respondent -BDA. Yet, the respondent -authorities for one reasons or the other delaying or protracting the matter. He submits that now the respondent - BDA have issued an endorsement as per Annexure -A calling upon the petitioner yet again to furnish following documents, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 namely, (i) self affidavit (ii) joint affidavit (iii) Indemnity Bond (iv) Signatures and photographs with certificate issued by the Gazetted Officer and (v) Legal heirs Certificate of late J. George Mathew duly certified by the Tahsildar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all these documents have already been furnished, yet the respondent -BDA is not considering the matter, constraining the petitioner to approach this Court once again. 6. In response, learned counsel for the respondent - BDA submits that since the petitioner claims to have submitted all the documents, they will process the matter and do the needful by executing the absolute sale deed in favour of the wife of the original allottee as expeditiously as possible. 7. Submission is taken on record. 8. Necessary to note that the original allottee that is husband of the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing writ petition in W.P.No.5075/2021, which was allowed. That non-compliance of the said direction issued thereunder resulted in initiation of the contempt proceedings. Despite submission on the records, the respondent -BDA has not - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 complied with the said direction, unfortunately, the said J George Mathew as well as his attorneys stated to have passed away. Constraining the petitioner being the wife of the original allottee to restart the entire exercise afresh which has resulted in the petitioner approaching this Court exactly on the similar line as that of her husband done during his lifetime. 9. There may be justification on the part of the respondent -BDA in calling upon the petitioner to produce the documents in view of the subsequent events but since the petitioner is stated to have furnished all the documents as requisitioned by the respondent-BDA, there is no justification in respondent -BDA denying or delaying the process, unless there are certain legal impediment which are required to be made known to the petitioner, which is not the case at hand. 10. In that view of the matter, the petition is disposed of directing the respondent -BDA to expedite the process of issuing the deed of conveyance in the name of the wife of the original allottee, within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:3696 WP No. 24861 of 2024 is permitted to represent herself through power of attorney before the respondent -authorities. It is made clear in view of the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter, any delay on the part of the respondent -BDA in complying with the direction issued by this Court shall result in concerned officer paying Rs.5,000/-, for each day's delay untill execution of deed of sale. The said amount to be paid by the concerned officer from his own personal account. SD/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41