SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SC) 1510

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SURYA KANT AND NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH, JJ.
The Commissioner, Bengaluru Development Authority
Versus
T. Seetharamappa (dead) thr. Lrs
CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 6809, 6810 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP©Nos.13871-13872 of 2021) with C.A. No. 6811 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 20723 of 2022, C.A. No. 6812 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21411 of 2022, C.A. No. 6813 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21597 of 2022, C.A. No. 6814 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21473 of 2022, C.A. No. 6815 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21617 of 2022, C.A. No. 6816 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21285 of 2022, C.A. No. 6817 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21408 of 2022, C.A. No. 6818 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21394 of 2022, C.A. No. 6819 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21447 of 2022, C.A. No. 6820 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21550 of 2022, C.A. No. 6821 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21236 of 2022, C.A. No. 6822 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21253 of 2022, C.A. No. 6823 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21409 of 2022, C.A. No. 6824 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21441 of 2022, C.A. No. 6825 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21287 of 2022, C.A. No. 6826 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 21274 of 2022, C.A. No. 6827 of 2025 @ SLP© No . 3248 of 2023, C.A. No. 6828 of 2025 @ SLP© No . 6155 of 2023, C.A. No. 6829 of 2025 @ SLP© No . 7481 of 2023, C.A. No. 6830 of 2025 @ SLP© No . 7482 of 2023, C.A. No. 6831 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 15821 of 2023, C.A. No. 6832 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 15822 of 2023, C.A. No. 6833 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 14433 of 2023, C.A. No. 6834 of 2025 @ SLP© No. 18596 of 2023 and C.A. No. 6835 of 2025 @ SLP(C) No. 23579 of 2023
Decided on : 14-05-2025

Headnote:(A) Writ of Mandamus - Basic principles governing allotments - No duty on local authority to extend time beyond statutory limits if payments are not made as per allotment conditions - The ruling affirms that allotments can be canceled for persistent defaults in payment. (Paras 4, 6, 10)

(B) Jurisdiction of High Courts - Scope of review, especially regarding time-sensitive allotment agreements, restating that courts should uphold terms agreed by parties in statutory frameworks - Parties are to adhere to established timelines. (Paras 8, 10)

Facts of the case:
The appellants, the Bengaluru Development Authority, canceled allotments of sites made to respondents due to persistent defaults in payment of stipulated amounts. The High Court earlier allowed the respondents' plea to restore the allotments, which the appellant contested.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld that allottees must adhere to timelines stipulated in the allotment conditions. The cancellation of allotments was justified due to defaults in payment.

Issues: The high court's power to restore allotments when due payments were not made and the obligations of the respondents regarding timely payment.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that legal obligations set forth in allotment agreements must be followed, and failures in compliance justify cancellation. Prior court decisions asserted no obligation to extend payment periods was placed on the authority.

Result: Appeals allowed; High Court judgments set aside.

Table of Content
1. overview of appeals against allotment judgments (Para 2 , 3)
2. conditions and failures in site allotment process (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. court's allowance of delay in representation (Para 7)
4. court's reasoning on duties of the allottee (Para 8 , 9)
5. maintaining consistency based on previous ruling (Para 10)
6. final decision to allow appeals and refund (Para 11 , 12 , 13)

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The lead matter in this batch of appeals is directed against the common impugned judgment dated 17.02.2021, passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, in Writ Appeal No. 3890/2019 and Writ Appeal No. 2770/2019, thereby upholding the judgment of the learned Single Judge, in terms whereof the Appellant (BDA) was directed to decide the representations of the allottees in accordance with law. Insofar as the connected appeals are concerned, they arise out of the common impugned judgment dated 23.09.2022 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru disposing of a batch of writ appeals whereby allotment of sites were ordered to be restored in favour of the individual allottees. There are certain other connected appeals which though arise out of different impugned judgments passed by the High Court but pertain to the same controversy.

3. Broadly, in all these cases sites were allotted by the Appellant to the Respondents at various places in Bengaluru. These allotments were made at different times but largely in and around the year 2000. While the facts pertaining to each allotment such as the site and payment of value by the Respondents are different, the dispute in all these cases pertains to the cancellation of allotment by BDA on account of non-payment of balance sital value. For the sake of convenience, we are adverting to the facts of the lead matter only, however, the decision shall be applicable on all the connected matters, alike.

4. The BDA allotted different sites admeasuring 40x60 ft. to the private respondents in Anjanapura layout on 07.07.2001 or so. The allotments were made as a welfare measure in favour of the members of the Scheduled Castes community at a highly concessional rate. Some of the terms and conditions of the allotment were as follows:

    "1. In the prescribed affidavit format enclosed herewith on Rs.15.00 stamp paper to be olemnised (sic), and the additional information form is to be filled, and within 15 days of receipt of this allotment letter is to be submitted. Failed to do so the site allotted to you is deemed to have refused and the site allotment without, issue of notice will be cancelled and the registration fee will be forfeited.

    2. The site total value out of Rs.343450/- after the initial deposit is deducted the remaining amount of Rs.326250/- within 30 days of receipt of the allotment letter is to be paid to the authority. And if the balance amount is not paid, the allotment of site without any prior intimation will be cancelled and the registration fee will be forfeited.

    3. In case if the prescribed balance amount cannot be paid within 30 days, you can submit an application and can obtain 60 days time for payment with l8% interest and obtain the extended time intimation in writing with in the extended time if the balance amount is not paid. The allotted site without any prior notice the allotment will be cancelled and the earlier paid registration fee will be forfeited.(this condition is not applicable for altenate site allotment).

    4. The amount payable should be paid in the form of Demand Draft or through remittance of cash in BDA Premises Canara Bank Extension Counter or Indian Overseas Bank KP West Branch, and in this regard intimation to be made to the BDA.

    5. After remittance of the above said site amount, the absolute sale deed form will be given. The allotee of the site should get registration of the absolute sale deed.

At the time of the handing over of the site which is mentioned in this allotment letter is subjected to verification.

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    Judicial Analysis

    AI

    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top