IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, n
DATED THIS THE 13% DAY OF Angus': C2303} C Q
BEFORE
THE HCNBLE MR. JUSTICE
WRIT PETITION Né';.T3'344 CF,2oo%3 (S) H
m
BETWEEN:
1 DEEPAK P GULRAJANI C -
S /CPREM. H GULRAJAN§._'~.CV_ % AV
AGED 45 PRO~PRIETOR____f'
Ml 3-MEN'3:AlT0UCH»1'SHQPI N0--.6,
WHOLE s'ALE¥ARE:C,.1eTH MAIN ROAD
4TH..Bi;OCK«;,JAYANAGAR"SHOPPING COMPLEX
BANGALORE+seo*o.11
(By sri K i$r«sC'BB;3R:tCCY ék VIVEK s REDDY, ADV.)
.....
A 1′ ‘C » TEv!E’CGiMMISSIONER
% BMP«,_Cf}RPORATION OFFICE
A A Cv*N.R.sQU;AhRE, BANGALORE
2 u’1%I«i’1E; ASST REVENUE OFFICER
n EMF, SOUTH MARKET
_ ‘JAYANAGAR SHOPPING COMPLEX
‘ ‘ “JAYANAGAR, BLORE–11
. . . PETITIONER.
. .. RESPONDENTS.
(By Sri B V MURALIDHAR, ADV. )
THIS w.1=>. FILED PRAYING TO QUASH xnoiéieemzx. K
91*. 17.1.2003 BY R2; DIRECT THE RESPC};NI)E}I\{TS.__1*3.0T
TAKE FORCIBLE POSSESSEON or THE srioppszernisss
BEARING NO.6, SITUATED AT WHOLE SAI..E.uYARD,
MAIN, 4TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR’ ‘SHC1PP_EN’Gj CGMPL«EX5 *
BANGALORE–11 UNTIL DISPOSAL or THE APPEAL EIL}ED’*~–_ 1
BY THE PETITIONER IN MISC. “APJ’E-.’_EAL I’€.();~15«/2Q0.3″~ON
THE FILE or om own; iisooes”, VBAN(.fiAL_QRE page
SUBJECT TO DECISION THEREQN. ..
THIS PETITION ooM1No.’e0N..p% ma -HEA§RING THIS
DAY, THE cover MADETHE EOLLQWING:
The shop No.6 at Wholesale
Yard, pursuant to the licence
deed deited o’i1»s”‘.t1:1o1it111y licence fee of Rs. 1500/–,
a copy oi”xt1*1ev is produced at Annexure–A.
, A_ to the deed, the petitioner has been carrying
the said premises. Sufiice it to say that 3.
470 of the Karnataka Municipal
Act was issued by the respondent which was
it ‘Cfreceived by the petitioner on 26.11.2002 claiming arrears of
R.s;. 47,434/- from 1.6.1993 to 31.12.1998, a copy of the
, it same is produced at Annexure-B. This notice was seriously
disputed by the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the
petitioner had ‘initiated proceedings in Misc. Appeal No.
3
15/2003 on the file of the Add}. City Civil Judge Bangalore
under sections 470 and 471 of K.M.C. Act. An order
was granted.
2. Mr. Muralidher, learned
respondent submits that the’ is.
detexmixiafion made by the ,434/– has
been set at naught reniitted to the
Corporation for flesh A with law.
3. What writ petition is Annexure-K,
a notice issued’ hyj-.thes respondents for contravention of the
V’ ‘–conditions «of the””iiCenoe, namely, he being a chronic
;ie:*g];;1:e;~ },i0ence fee and he was directed to surrender
the of the shop Within a period of three days.
The saidjuotioe is issued under section 370(2) of the K.M.C.
basis for issuance of notice is the default in
pefizment of lease amount. When the very basis for issuance
it ‘ of notice is taken away and the matter is remitted to the fl
/
Z’
4
Corporation for flesh disposal, to may mind, Annexure-K
warrants interference.
4. Consequently, the petition” AV
stands quashed. It is open, for {I1e1″respo;o.(ie§1ts
appropriate proceedings if 3 is S of ‘1V:Vhe
conditions. A’ V V’ % A V
Pursuant to the the petitioner
was directed séungeéfsR§{5so,ooo/- within two
weeks. It is deposited. It is
needless to in deposit shall be
sobject toitlie fmol
V. V mfifaeiejsbsoiute. *
Sd/-
Judge