Loading...

P Puttaraju vs Chief Officer on 23 September, 2010

Karnataka High Court
P Puttaraju vs Chief Officer on 23 September, 2010
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

THE HONBLE MR. -JUSTICE ATsHOK¢BT.; 

DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER».

BEFORE

WRIT PETITION NOS.29365-318?'  %20Os} [LB;.R%1:g1O}% " 

BETWEEN

1

P.PU'I'I'ARAJU  T. .
S/O PUTTASWAMYO  * 

AGED ABOUT 46  jy

R/O TRIV:;N1NAGAR"V.; _  - 
T.NARA51PT;pA TALLIEK"  _ 
 'V      .
MYSORED1sTR1cf1'*--.'jj  '  

N'.MAiIAL)EVAf '  .
 -
AGEI) ABO U«T'~35' YEARS
R/O._IN'DIRP~.-- COLONY.
T.NARA.S1PURA TOWN

; '1'.NARAS'IPURA TALUK
 '~'e.1v1§(sO_R1a: DISTRICT

 .. V  MARINAIKA

AGED' ABOUT 41 YEARS

'. '-«R/O --NAYAi{ARA BEEDI

A  T. NARASIPURA TOWN

 NARASEPURA TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT

' TB.PUTTARAJU
S/O BASAVANNA

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
R/O NANJUNGUD ROAD
T. NARASEPURA

MYSOREJ DESTRECT



RAMARAJ URS

AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/O INDIRA COLONY
TNARASIPURA

MYSORE DISTRICT

SAKAMMA

C /O APPALAIAH

AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
VINAYAKA COLONY
TNARASIPURA

MY SORE DISTRICT

SANJEEVARAJE URS

AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS  I

R/O INDIRA COLONY
TNARASIPURA V _  5
MYSORE DISTRICT.  --

v.MAOAPPA.   - if
S/O LATE 'XZENKA'i'ALM:i

AGED A1BOiJ'T_5]_ YEARS  ;.  

  

    ._
MYSORE D_ISTP.IC"1'__«_  ~ . 

D.PANDURA:\';--GA=_sE'£41Y

4 ; AGED ABOUT' 45 "YEARS
._  ' <R_/._Q REDDY 'COLONY
T. NARAs_1PURA

I " » .';f)1sTRIcT

10%

 Ac;ED.ABOU'1' 41 YEARS

VINAYAKA COLONY
'I'.N.ARASIPURA

" *  AMYSORE DISTRICT

YSHARADAMMA

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/O INDIRA COLONY
TNARASIPURA TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT



12

13

14

15

I6

KULLA @ {KRISHNA}
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
R/O INDIRA COLONY
TNARASIPURA
MYSORE DISTRICT

NINGANNA J _
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS ' "
R/O VINAYAKA COLONY

T. NARASIPURA TALUK V

MYSORE DISTRICT *

SHASI-IIKALA
w/O PRAKASH  
AGED ABOUT SSYEARS  A .
R/O SRIRAMPURA' BEEDI  
TNARASIPURA  I
MYSORE I)I:'f«.TRICT  

 '    
AGED _ABO_I.IT 40 YEARS" 
HEII4fiV}% R.A. *E_12ED_I' ' I
NARASVIPURA TALUK
MYSORE D?53_'R,1.C"I*.__ --. ' '

m,YI~MwA     
AGED "ABOU'I.'- 40*_YEARS

_; R/O INDIRA. COLONY
.f__'°T.;NAI?ASIPURA"TALUK

IVIYSORB2._ DISTRICT

_  
 W/O' SEIF\/ASWAl\/IY

A  AGEDABOUT 60 YEARS

R/O T. NARASIPURA TOWN & TALUK

 I _ MIISORE DISTRICT

. SASAVARAJU

S/O LATE APPAIAH SETTY
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/O TRIVENINAGAR
TNARASIPURA TALUK
MYSORE DISTR!CT



19 SCIRISI-«I

S/O LATE SIDDANARAYANA

AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

No.52.-3, SRERAMPURA BEEDHI
TNARASIPURA TOWN 8: TALUK

MYSORE DISTRICT

20 SWAMY

S/O CHINNASWAMI

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS    v ~
R/O SRIRAMAPURA EEEDHI, NO_.522  " *
TNARASIPURA TOWN 3: ' --
MYSORE DISTRICT ' _

21 KUMAR   ._
S/O KALA NAIAKA' 'I   
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS;_ .,
NARAYANAi3EEI§IHI"'~« _  
T. NARASIIJ'IIIIt~:A TC)WN''TALUK'-- " 
MYSORI53IDISiffRICT._4_ I'   »  PETITIONERS

 ..  R  ADv., I
AND:  I I I I  I
CHIEF OFFICER  .

TOWN _RANC'IIA&'IAf1*I»I O_FF'1CE
T.NA_RASIPURA  V

 *  _MY-SORE.AD}ISTRICT"' ----   RESPONDENT

'  A';  .  B NARAYANA, ADV., FOR C/R)

 TIRIESE WRIT PETITONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLE

226 ANDj_227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
  TOCIQUASH THE RESOLUTION DATED 11.9.09, PASSED BY
"R1 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE--D AND ETC.

THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR

 "PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE
' THE ROLLOWINO:



ORDER

The petitioners have called into quest,iVonfl”.th.e

resolution, dated 11.9.2009 (.Annexure-D}

respondent.

2. The facts of the ‘case in 0hriefiV’VarLgu.thVat.’3 the

petitioners are the lessees _:sv:eAvevi?a1 shop
units in the commercial’0–.co%n’ip0i’e§§’:.:be,1onging to the
respondent. Finding” in a
dilapidated resolved to
” :’f:’he,:iresp0ndent made the
petitioners “shop units assuring that they

would be V’i*e4–acco’inn1odat.ed on the reconstruction of the

shopping corrip1ev,~:,_ _____ “In this regard, the respondent has

an agreement, dated 14.3.2005

{2iri_th the petitioners and twelve other

simiiarlfplaced occupants of the shop units. On the

“..js*.co1n’p1Aeti’on of the reconstruction, the petitioners

agitated their right of re–entry. On the respondent

“showing inaction in the matter, they filed

W.P.Nos.2513525157/2009, which were disposed of by
figfiiei;

6

this Court. by its order, dated 25.8.2009 directing the
respondent to consider the cases of the petiti4o_n:ergs~.V’in

accordance with law.

3. The respondent, Vide its resoiuitioniii dated -. r

11.9.2009 {Annexure«~D] decided

in the new shopping complex Vby’°hold;ing_:

auction. The resolution more funds
are required for tidirig..V:’o\_rge’rg difficulties of
the respondents It earlier lease
agreement the petitioners
are not resolution, which is being
assailed’ Hudlamane, the learned

counsei*.for the petitioners.

».4°5~r:i:’_j..Hegde I-Iudlamane submits that the

petitione~rs’£’..–have voluntarily vacated the shop units

based the agreement entered into between the

–,.re–spuondent and the petitioners and others. He further

…_submits that the said agreement is not against any

public policy and is not opposed to law. He brings to

my notice that the agreement provides for the fixing of

fifiiri

7

the necessary rent and the tax. He further su.bmit_s___ that

the petitioners are also willing and ready to

reasonably enhanced rent.

5. The learned counsel ifeliescoin th’e._dec1sioh

this Court in the case___

SUBHANRAO NALAWADE V; “l HASANALI
MAKANI AND oTH1a1.ij:3,g ._AIR 1992 so
1780. He read out the-pp-ortion pg-15in: Head Note [ ),

which is ext_r£1cte§it’hereini:~e1o\§J: -if . l

“In pi.::rs-uance” compromise reached
‘ landlord the possession of
over to the landlord on
the enrpressvlstipulations that on the construction of

5 the new the tenant would get an identical

A §heréfn;” “”” The fresh construction was
.iVcorry:2leted __but instead of honouring the pledge
landlord in the form of an
“un.dert’alang” he inducted third persons therein

up andg_did not make any ojfer to the tenant or after
V * r 4_ death to his heir until the matter reached the
V’ v ..nHigh Court on the second occasion and the writ
petitions filed by third parties were being argued
after the lapse of about 24 years. In the
circumstances there can be no conceivable reason

to condemn the tenant for her insistence for the

£3}-A

benefits under the consent decree or for any
sympathy with the landlord or the third
inducted by landlord. The landlord mast be A’
liable for making his undertaking good as:

for any suitable compensaiiontfor the

of more than two decades

6. Sri H.B.Narayana.,:VV:”‘the
appearing for the . that the
relationship between petitioners
is that of 1icei1’s:orI”a11li._ have no
vested of the shop units.

He at AnneXure–A is
oPDOsecl= ‘Rule 39 of the Karnataka

Municipalities[Gnidance of Officers, Grant of Copies

‘l V. °and’=I\llié-scellvaneousWlllrovisions} Rules 1966 (‘1966 Rules’

“the_l~shop units cannot be leased without

holclillg auction. The provisions of Rule 39 of

Flules are extracted hereinbel0w:–

“39. Procedure in respect of lease. sale
or auction:- Save as otherwise provided in the Act”
or rules, when the Municipal Council proposes to

lease. sell or auction any moveable or immovable

Qifili;

property, it shaii give notice of such lease, sale or
auction by« VV
{U affixing copies thereof on the noiice..bootfid:”‘ij* ”
Of the Offices Of the Municiptll Councflg’ V ” 3

(ii) exhibiting copies ther’eoj”i.n, an

reading rooms and places by V

M an icipai Council ii i”o__ be conspicuoiis A._:w.itHhVin3
the Municipality; ‘V b V’ ‘V V’ 1

(iii) publication inia neiospaper having
wide circulation iuiihin 1ihe«.M”u.n~ic_ipaiity;

(iv) “by.:beai:–of é:ir’iim’o:::ciicu£siiion of notice in
K V
7} : ‘SriV’V’Na1fa3rai1.a””submits that this Rule is

c0InpIimef1t_4aI3.r Vb’to4VK_Sec.Iiion 72 of the Karnataka

Mu_n:icip_aliiiesb “‘£A’;<..'..fC,,__..v 1964, which deals with the

the Municipal Council to lease, sell and

contract bits? 'pfoperties.

A. L The learned counsel has also relied on the

decisions of this Court in the case of SHABEER AHMED

° TOWN MUNICIPALITY, BANTWALA AND ANOTHER

passed on 15.7.2008 in W.P.No.3714/2008 (LB-RES),

§§§”!:

10

and of MORAN P. SONU V. STATE OF

AND OTHERS, reported in 1992(2) Kar.L.J. 245i4{ois;<}.f–teg'

9. The decision in the case of b

(supra) has no application for the facts)of_tliis–.case,_llZn

the said case, Shabeer himself haduV_pa,rtic:pla;iéa_’m f;t;1fie f,

earlier public auction. In the caseititnjis nobody’s
case that the petitionei’_sfhaxie e_oine_’through the auction

route. _ ‘

10. VMOHAN P. SONU v.

STATI;’f “&”‘oTHERs, reported in
1 992(2) — .’ marginal land measuring

5′ XV50′ soidA”vto””‘the adjoining owner without

requirements of public law.

4lthe’_j.purchaser in the case of Mohan Sonu

(supra) not in possession of the marginal lands

“before Municipality soid it.

“All. In the case on hand, it is not in dispute that

” petitioners are smaliwtimers and that they have been

in possession of the shop units for a long period of 20

years from 1985 to 2005. Whether they should have
§i§%i.

1.1

been given the shop units in 1985 without observing the

requirement of public law is not the issue beforel”ni’e,g:””,It

is not known why the respondent did not

public auction for allotting the-“”sh–op

Having not chosen to do so, the re~sp’o_nxdent’has ~_

the settled position of the “for it

12. Further, exercised the
option of term1’r.1atir1g:.t~he_:l’eas¢j.,9r.l.Iicence, as the case
may be. that, then the
petitioners It V tenants holding over
liable belease period is over or the
tenancyagrgeernentlllhasli it is always open to the

respondent ei’th._er to: institute the suits against the

petitioners-.o1=._to evict them taking recourse to the

proV*ision’:ff’_”Contained in Public Premises (Eviction of

V -V Unaut.horised Occupants) Act, 1974.

it * When the building had to be reconstructed in

.,2_0lO5, the respondent persuaded the petitioners to

“llvacate the shop units with the assurance that they

would be rewaccommodated in the reconstructed

fifiii.

12

building. I am afraid, the respondent cannot resile___from

the assurance. The petitioners cannot be pena1is.e_d.V’i”or

acting on the assurance given by the V’

Having aroused their legitimate»’exp.ectatiofi=thatthey.’

would get the re–entry in the

building, the respondent is yjustiliied’ in jnov-Jwturlning it

around and saying that the assu’i”ancellgive-ii by the
respondent is not ‘vagreeinent is

contrary to lawn; “_~_

14. r;easlon”V respondent in the
resolution that’.th,e”relsplondent has to auction the shop
units to enable itself over the financial difficuities

is ncifilground xfor,lgoin_g back on the assurance held out

‘Apetvitioners. Further, the agreement itself

thelllfixation of proper rent and property tax.

‘V Theta petitioners have also shown their bonafides by

..agreeing to pay the reasonably enhanced rents. It is for

respondent and the petitioners to negotiate and

it “arrive at upper revision of the rate of rent and the tax.

§fi§~§.

13

15. The position taken by the resp0ndent__.in its

statement of objections that the petitioners may

approach the Civil Court and seek the

unfortunate, to say the least-;””Thpe its

instrurnentaiities have to act fairijg and”

They have to be model land or ‘ease it

may be.


16. For ailvthei hold that the
impugned   I quash it. 1
direct    the case of the

petitioners the shop units in the letter
and 14.3.2005 (AnneXure–

A). ,,.f%Ifherr.1ibertyV.is:HeXpress1y reserved to the respondent

rate of rent and the property tax Within

of its perception of What is reasonable

‘V and.uaft’er negotiating with the petitioners. Liberty is

reserved to the respondent to terminate the

‘ 1Ai’een’ee/ lease, if it is otherwise open to the respondent to

so and for the right and valid reasons. If the

respondent exercises these liberties, then the

figfi

I4

respondent is obliged to hold the public auction and

thereafter allot the shop units. On the expiry vcfthe

lease period or termination of licence, if the-:’pi§ib.Iic

auction is to be held, it is also open to the petiti.onet’sA

take part in the same.

193 These petitions are

order as to costs.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information