Karnataka High Court
G.S.Ravindra - Appellant
Versus
Chairman, Bangalore Development Authority - Respondent
Decided On : 09-19-97
W.P. : 3090 of 1997
BDA - Authority to impose penalty for construction time extension - BDA Act Section 72, Rule 13(6) and (7) - The court discussed the authority of the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to impose and collect penalty for extending the time for construction of buildings in the sites allotted by BDA. The court analyzed the provisions of BDA Act Section 72 and Rule 13(6) and (7) of the allotment rules, highlighting the absence of authority for BDA to impose penalty for non-compliance with the allotment rules or the terms and conditions of the lease-cum-sale agreement where the BDA has power to extend the time. The court emphasized that the imposition of penalty should be based on individual cases and reasons for contravention, and the procedure adopted by the BDA should comply with the principles of natural justice.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, allottees of sites by Bangalore Development Authority, challenged the imposition of penalty for not constructing buildings within the prescribed period. The BDA contended that the only remedy available to the petitioners is to institute a suit for appropriate relief and the writ petition for breach of contract is not maintainable.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the BDA lacked the authority to impose penalty for non-compliance with the allotment rules or the terms and conditions of the lease-cum-sale agreement where the BDA has power to extend the time. The court also held that the procedure adopted by the BDA was against the principles of natural justice.
Issues: Authority of BDA to impose penalty, Maintainability of writ petition for breach of contract
Ratio Decidendi: The BDA lacked authority to impose penalty for non-compliance with the allotment rules or the terms and conditions of the lease-cum-sale agreement where the BDA has power to extend the time. The procedure adopted by the BDA was against the principles of natural justice.
Final Decision: The petitions were allowed, and the Circular dated December 3, 1996, and the demand notices impugned in these petitions were quashed. No order as to costs.
( 1 ) THE question that falls for consideration in these petitions is as to, whether the Bangalore Development Authority, hereinafter called "the BDA", has authority of law to impose and collect penalty to extend the time for construction of buildings in the sites allotted by BDA? and, if so, whether the imposition of penalty is in accordance with law?
( 2 ) IN view of the question of law and fact being similar in all these petitions, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
( 3 ) ALL these petitioners except the petitioners in the first set, are the allottees of sites by Bangalore Development Authority on various dates, varying from October 10, 1986 to August 3, 1989. The petitioners in W. P. Nos. 3090-91/1997 are the purchasers of sites at the public auction conducted by the erstwhile City Improvement Trust Board, Bangalore, in the years 1965 and 1968 respectively. The sites in question are situated either in Hennur-Banasawadi layout or Nagarabhavi IInd Stage or Hosur-Sarjapur layout excepting the site in W. P. 16350/1997 which is situated in Banashankari IIIrd Stage.
( 4 ) THE allotment of sites have been made in accordance with the provisions of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules 1984, hereinafter called the 'rules'. That according to the Rules, the allottee should execute a lease-cum-sale agreement and the site allotted to him will be held by him as a lessee for a period of ten years and on the completion of which the BDA would execute the sale deed conferring the absolute title on the allottee. The allottee is also required to construct a building for the purpose for which the site is allotted within a period of two years from the date of possession or within the extended period. The BDA is also empowered to cancel the allotment and resume the site for non-compliance with any of the provisions of the Rules or the terms and conditions of lease-cum-sale agreement.
( 5 ) THE petitioners in these petitions, admittedly, have not put up any constructions in the sites allotted to them. Some of the petitioners filed applications for execution of the sale deed in view of expiry of lease period and some have filed applications to sanction the plan and issue licence, to construct a house in the site allotted to them. As there is breach of conditions of allotment or the sale, as the case may be, the Bangalore Development Authority, hereinafter called the 'bda', issued notices similar to Annexures-G and H produced in first petition imposing penalty upon the petitioners in different sums varying from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 1,02,856/- in order to execute the sale deed and to issue licence for construction of the houses by extending the time. These notices are stated to have been issued in view of the Circular dated December 3, 1996 issued by the BDA. The petitioners having been aggrieved by the Circular and the notices have filed these petitions to quash the notices and the Circular by issuing a writ of certiorari, that the same have been issued without authority of law.
( 6 ) IT is contended by the petitioners that they could not take up construction of houses, since essential services, like water supply, electricity and underground drainage has not been provided in the layouts and if the petitioners were to have constructed the house within the time it would have been impossible for them to have lived in the house for want of essential services required for want of habitation. It is their case that even now some of the basic amenities are not provided in the layouts. In support of their case, the petitioners in one of the petitions, have produced the proceedings of the Karnataka Legislative Assembly dated March 20, 1997 wherein the question of recovery of penalty by BDA, came up for discussion. In answer to the question, if there is any instance of failure to provide essential services like water supply and underground drainage in the BDA layouts formed 10 years back, an
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.