High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri C.S.Muddappa S/O Sri. C.C. vs The Deputy Commissioner on 7 August, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Sri C.S.Muddappa S/O Sri. C.C. vs The Deputy Commissioner on 7 August, 2009
Author: P.D.Dinakaran(Cj) & V.G.Sabhahit
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALOREV.

DATED THZS THE 7m DAY OF' AUGUST 2093 I  " 

PRESENT

THE HONBLE MR. 13.1). D1NAKARAi§iV,'CE::E1f  _ 

AND

THE HONBLE MR.JUSI*1c§:'<v.G.SABm§£IT"a:   '

WRIT PE'1'IT1oN.No. .199'? 5.'/2609

BETWEEN:

1 SR1 c.S.:\z:Ijr.D1:{A:1é?PA.'j«  '   
S/O SR1'. C.'C';SUB.BAI1X}1A, *  
AGEP._53"'YE*'¥E?;$'.   "
CO?FFEE'PI.}§ANTER, _' .
FORESTv1Ew'jES'1tATE A. ' '
KANOOR_," _ V _. V.  
v1RAJPET'1jAma< 
 KODAb}U';"" "  PE'1'ITIONER

 N"EAT§.fmi)EANAm KAMATH, ADVOCATE. )

  7.1 'I'HE I).EPU"IY COMMISSIONER

--  T. , URBAN DIST.
" 'V BANGALORE

   THE TAHSILDAR,



K. RPURAM
BANGALORE. ... .RESPONDENTS

[By Smt INILOUFER AKBAR AGA. }

THIS W.P. IS FILED PRAYING TO

RESPONDENTS HEREIN To HAND OVER POSSESSION “OF .: ‘

THE PROPERTY BEARING UNIT NO. 5002 ON.__I_I”~.AI”JD Hi

FLOORS APARTMENT COMPLEX IN.:PRIlDEN’I’IAI§;f.t?’AV’Aj§
WITH SUPER BUILT UP AREA 011′ 15″61; SQ’;F’F._ ‘wITH.___’

MOSAIC FLOORING SITUATED AT KOD_I1~’iALLi– VILLAGE ‘V

VARTHUR HOBLI, BANGALORE EAST V

PE’I’I”I’IONER AS DIRECTED BY._Ti::E KARNATAif.iiv}’.:1″c’L’_1’y Hearing on
this day, SABHAHITV.-J., ma:1,d’evth:e fo–1iCwing_, «V ” ”

C A _
ThiSx’W1″ii_ petiti’of1«.iS%f.11e–r,1 under Articles 226 and 227 of

the C0nStit11tiQi1″0f ‘hid.ie1″…Seeking for a direction to the

‘res orjidents to han”d~ov.eiv ossession of the To ert bearin
_ P P P Y

V.Unit.”NO.j5QO2 I1 and III floors of Apartment Complex in

V Prude.ntia1VPLi7vj’atiC1’ii7ith Super building up area of 1561 Sq.ft.

with Itiosaiic flooring situated at Kodihalli Village, Varthur

‘I:-_ifcI¥3nii§d”.BzaIv1§a1ore East Taluk to the petitioner as directed by

dfiemataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal

\.»>’

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submitted that since no action is taken by the second

respondent despite the order passed by the State Commission

to execute the award passed by it in Execution”*l?et’it:ion,vu

No.17/2004 and Deputy Commissioner has arr,

order directing the second respondentflto e;i;ecut’e

per the order the Tahsiidar hVas_flnotA’tai{en any. steps arid V

therefore, the direction as soughtlfoprltin the” may
be granted. C

5. The leanqgd’ Addl;Goyerr1In€_nt..VAdyocate submitted

that the Tahsiidarv-‘1ia.séalreadytaken action on the basis of the

order passedpby Vbeputy. ::Co.mmissior1er, he has collected

Rs.26,Q_()0/_– inue::_eVc’t1tion’ of the award and balance amount

andmorder of the Deputy Commissioner will

be- . P’

Weihaye given careful consideration to the contention

tb.e__ learned counsel for the parties and scrutinised the

_ rnateriai on record.

\f’>’~¢

aiready proceeded in the matter and in Vi€W of the submission
of the learned Additional Government Advocate that the award

will be executed expeditiously, apart from notingdlrthe

submission of the learned Additional Government”‘Advo_Ca;te”

having regard to the above said facts, thatd.’_th’e,-‘

petitioner is not entitled to any other! further

petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition'”t»is d1sp.r_§_sed.’–= the

above said observations. V

sd/2
aaaaa IUDGE

ks90″**”

7 . Inde2€:”Yes/.No”V’ /,..

” ” Web Host; Yes/No