High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Sushila W/O Devinder Pukale vs The Hubli Dharwad Municipal … on 31 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Smt Sushila W/O Devinder Pukale vs The Hubli Dharwad Municipal … on 31 July, 2008
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer
IN T113 HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

CIRCUIT BENH AT DHARWAD

mzrga THES THE am DAY €)_l_§'HJL_i_LY :,:U03..'Ii'j; .  '-

BEFORE}

THE HOPVBLE MRJUSTICE  A81i1:__Ii;   

wnrr PETITION K0.61;?6. @QO8 (Laj '  
BETWEEN:  'A 'A ' F' H H

Smt. Sushfia

W/0. Devinder Pzzkalé' 

Aged about 71 years  ._ =. V A
Occ: Pmcessing_.£:1CQ;3cilé:V.'i;?ax   .
R/0. PID No.2:;2{:s  46A»{Zoj::: '1~:---4:.f'>.;s)'=, 
{Old Man No,%103'A)%  ,_ _  " ._ " "  
Chitguppi Park,"P3ltV£to I-'.{§a'd_  "

Hub1;i--~58G.,_02£?' .    -- 3  PETITEONER

(By Sri: Maxm.  Ad§';7.fm€ 
Sri. S. Pafthasaiaflli,  "

     %%%%% 

The V Eiiibijj Municipal Corporation
Hub-hf  V  

 _Rep. hy the Coifimiéssioner
 H E';dd:1'es§':._¥iD§§IiCV 
 L21;nington.. Read
" "": .}5;;}l131iAAf 580-r3=;2o  RESPONDENT

Gachchinamath, Adv.)

2

This Writ Petitian is flied under Articie 225 of the
Constitution of Endia, praying to direct the respondant to
immediately’ remove the seal cm the door and lock of the stall

No,6 on the First F1001′ ofthve Chitguppi Market Stall, Hubli.

This Writ petition coming on fizsr ._t3′::a_’s

court made the foilowingz

The hushané of the pe:i:ione:4;«Lj:’_a’s=i;;der”%
licensee crsf Stall N06 911 first
Stall, Zone $0.8, [Egon Re;-aé),
Hubli — 530 020, ~4;~é§s:§;o:;f;§::{§coxporaz:on
with efifect from of the pfitifionfir
died in the “l%:)ec2n3:1e the licence:
of the said ” fzlcéncre fea of the stall in
quesfion was R§.f).._ 5A0 ” effect from 01.02.1976.
£1. -was to: R%.’*2′;0Q____;;”3<:r Sq. ft. as per the resointicm

N5.'s§92i,'d~atm:._23.'a_i':3985 W.e.£ 23.114984. The ii-231106 fm

was per sq. ft. as per the resalufion

'1:–__No,-1071 éatfed'3i."é8.1985. However, the resolution No.10'?1

4: by a subsequent resolution No.1012 dates}

ésé and resolution No,692 dated 28,01.1985 was

X
I
1,

xx:

restored. Feeling aggrieved by the East resolutien,

petitioner filed 23: miscellaneous case N€).32f 1986 031 the j”

the I Add}, fiistriet Judge, Dhanvad sitt_1’_,ug_at

Disirici: Judge by his order elated 16.12.vI986″edisfIiie3eei’

said caee. It appears that the pefifiener noi*§)飧z?~.the

licence fee in accordance with’ the .V Efhe
petiitieuer was required to 3333:;-..£{“;eA ” fee ai the
rate of Rs.2.0{) per sq. ft. witiyeffeet which
was increased by fiemfom, the
respenelent has exereise of the
terms e:31:;ta3l3:r,:ee1″V’iV,eL ‘ V0310. 1983 entereci
into between by the said action
of the ::’esp0_mi,e;3t,%4ihe_:Vpe1§ii0fief«He1s filed this Writ petition.

figatter is taken up far orders today,

}”ieamed Clqeifisei petitioner submits that the petitioner

dieefite the rate of licence fee fixed by the

‘:.::ee.pc{:i’dee{;’*’_.He further submits that the pefitioner has paid

V. ~ each on 28.06.2004 and 28.07.2004 arid that

‘ uiespflndeni has not beeihtaken into account the aforesaid

H

4

amount whfle quantifying the total amount payable by

petitioner towards the licence fee. Learzled ~ V.

petitioner submits that the pefiiiouer will gay ‘of ”

R’s.i,O0,000f– immediately and for pa3?Iiiefit« o£:{£h;e

amount, reasonable time may be g1″anted.__to–_1ier. fie

submits that petifioner is ready; “pay éeiiergr

month towazfls the balance offihe

3. Leaxned Counsel the -eubznits that
the iota} licence fee payable :RSE5,14,6 17/ –
till 31.03.2008 submits
that if the elxe has made the
aforesaid tvieo «tt1e«j.tfeeQo.ndent will detiuct the said
aznoum: outof payable by her towards

licence fee.’ ~ _ Z ‘
V. ‘_ regard .to__t11e facts and circumstances of the

ctise; that the petitioner should be granted

vmasonzgtble –foAi? j;L)ayh1g the balance of licence fee. The

respondefitz also be ufirected to open the lock of the

31:23} in question and permit tbs pefifioner to co3;1ti1112e

avocatizm on payment of a part of the amount out 0:” ‘7’

amount payabie by the psiitioxmr.

5. In the light of the discussionslhimaéié’ a1$’Qve;’ ‘V

the foilowing order:

2;) The petitioner is di:’ecié€i:”:o
Rs,i,00,{}()0/- within a period: @1513-. ” O1:
such pa3»g1em’:, the IBSpC>I1d€’.fl{ ié iock of
the aforesaid stall on her
avocation/busi11es4s .V 1:’ . A 1 V’

1’1″) a 1″f:pI’€S€I1tafi0I1
seeking dedu€:”t:ipf: of payments said to have
been made by he}a,1o1:1gVjivif:§’.f£I3§;if:ceipts or other dacumcentg,
if .ar:;_y. _’»?’1:.1.r:t’ directed to consider the said

aperiod of one week fimm thc: date of its

__rec:eip§ :=2:ici–.Vpeié*§s’««é1ppi:.t§1V)riate orders thereoa.

.¢ iii} Tfiéévpéiisitioner is dimcied to pay the balanca cf the

.: aiR§.f-if},000/- pm. The firs: instaiment shall be

vfiéi’ §é}:*.f$m {)1.09.200f and COI’1tiI11;1€i to pay at the rate

ks

6
of Rs.40,{}(30/~ every month thereafier {iii the entire amount

towartls licence ffffi is paid.

iv) If the pefitionfir fails to pay the V’

licence fee as above, ltibtétrty is r€:se1W:d»t0~–‘:he ijfgsgfiiiéitfifii

take suitable action against the pefifiofibr i}_1 abcdid§3£.¢& :

law.

Writ petition is disposgd c:>f accoVifd.i11g1y. N£3″c»:3$ts, §

Jude;

Cs ——–