M/S Mohan Bhandar vs The Director Of Marketing on 19 November, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAIJOKRE
DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF NOvEMEER,'iéVOI"IjOD...
EEEORE  I I I.

THE HONELE MR.JUSTICI3S;ABDUL  

BETWEEN:

M/s.MOHAN BHANDAR
APMC, BANDIPALYA 

MYSORE, BY ITS PARTNER

PRAVEEN KUMAR,  I _ -_  ; ~ I 

AGESSYEARS     ...PETITIOI\IER

[By srI_EsfR  '  I

I  DIRECTOR OE";/IARKE'I'ING
_ APMO NOJ6, 1'=1_THRAJ BHAVAN ROAD
" BANGALORE: 560 001

  I E'T}IEIS.ECRE'FET2Y

., --A'OPR1«CULTORAI, PRODUCE MARKET
* ..(:OI\I::x/II«'IfI:EE. MYSORE  RESPONDENTS

£139.} M.C.NAGASHREE, HCGP FOR R1
 'V sRI H.K.'I'HI1\/EIVEE GOWDA, ADV. FOR R2}

THIS 'WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND

_ _I  THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
 DT. 10.12.08, VIDE ANI\E~A ISSUED BY THE R2.

THIS VVRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'ITiES DAY. THE COURT PASSED THE F'Ol..I.¢OWING:

WRIT PETITION No.3é§"'1V15.A_AO'I?' 20'I  ._



_.2_.
ORDER

The petitioner was a110t’.t,ed a site beariiig No.I-‘3- at

I’3an(‘Eipa1ya APEX/IC yard, Mysozfe. ‘Hie pe.t.iti()r1e;1″‘oilighii’V.T

have to put up {f()I’iStI’1..l(_?U(‘)I’1 on. the said sitewithina.Tpe:’1od”

of one year from the date of e:><eoL1i;ior,1To.f"lease*.c'11:i:.._Sa.}_e f

deed. Since the petitioner faile(1toVp1,1t"1.1pco1'i:s'trnetioi;1 as

above. respondent No.2 hae*.._xi'passed'-ah'"order dated
10.12.2008 as per A;;gf1je,x1i_1§es;Ai"-«iprfémng the site in
question. The petitiorier_.has-,oh.alien§edV'theivaliciity of the

said or:.ie1"v.1AO.12V.:2.{)£)8'–.»:.i:s pe"r"~~Ahr1ex1.ire-A in this writ
pet..it:ioI1.''-_ '

2. I have §t’i’3aJ;”».’._i t.i1e’ie’arned counsel for the parties.

-.I.,ea_rned xeousxiel for the petitioner submits that the

_p€titiO.13.(Ei7_ ‘not put up Construction on the said sites in

ao’corda11_oe’Wiéti the tcrrns and conditions of the scheme

V._n1ade “u:1A(‘1ie.r the provisioris of the Act (“me to the reasons

his control. He further submits that the petitioner

V will put up <:o:1st:"ucti.0i1 on the S:jt§(1 'site in ;-1coord.';u1c:e with

E

-v

»- -uiiwiwwimmmwmw

.. 3 _
the terms and eoriditioris of the said scheme within af1$£2ri0(i

of one year.

4. The subrnission of the Iearried eouh-seI–._t.fo.r the
petitioner is just and re:1soi.1abie. izlh ic_iengtit:_2iI.*r.n:3,tter3,

Court has; granted an yea:.r’s time? to «t’Ii=1Ae’ petit.iorierAtfhereiti to

but up (2()I1StI’l1CtiOr1 on the in
accordance with the of tease cum
sale agreement. petiti9:nAe r for the similar
order.

H Writttttgietition succeeds and is
a.c(:0r(.1iIig1_y_’ 4′ order dated 10.12.2008 at

Anne_;s:ure–A v-hereby V(‘;’ua.=’sl’1e(1. The petiti()ner are granted

itone”‘yeeir’°£re’1n¢_ today to put up eonstruetiori on the sites in

A’–questi.i)1i.’i1<1Vtaeeordance with the terms and eoriditions of the

saicia. schezne failing which liberty is reserved to the

h "i'eSp0r1de–r1t:s to take appropriate actiozii against the petitioner

' . i''.Y_1V'c'i;{.1{f'()I'(i£'3.I1(t€t with Iaw.

Edi:

Eufige

KLY /