Back
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
M.NAGAPRASANNA, J
SRI. UDAYA BASRUR – Appellant
Versus
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the process of auction, payment terms, and initial cancellation. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. arguments about the reasonableness of interest imposed. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's reasoning regarding the judicial delays affecting interest liability. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. final order modifying the demand notice and interest terms. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question a demand notice dated 12.02.2025, insofar as it imposes interest upon the delayed payment and also seeks a mandamus directing the respondent - BDA to refund the excess amount of interest collected to the tune of Rs.71,17,876/-.
2. Heard Shri Sathyanarayana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri Vinayaka S. Pandit, learned counsel appearing for the respondents
3. The facts adumbrated are as follows:
The BDA issues a notification on 30.01.2018 concerning site No.16, 4th Block, Sri M.V. Layout for e-auction. The auction was conducted between 06.02.2018 to 20.02.2018. The result of the auction is the emergence of the petitioner, as the successful bidder. The sum was declared to be Rs.1,52,98,800/- and called upon the petitioner to pay the balance amount within 45
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
