IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO. 841 OF 2015 (GM-KIADB) BETWEEN:
COGXAR RESEARCH AND SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT,1 OF 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.303, NIKITH ARCADE, 2ND MAIN ROAD, KASTURI NAGAR, BANGALORE-560 043.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SRI NAVEEN SRINIVAS (BY SRI. FREUD RICHARDSON, ADV., FOR MS/SMT. DEEPA V. ADV., ) AND:
1. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 14/3, 2ND FLOOR, R P BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
2. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 14/3, 2ND FLOOR, R P BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 … PETITIONER … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. BASAVARAJ V. SABARAD ADV., FOR R-1 AND R-2) - - -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO EXECUTE AND REGISTER, AT THE PETITIONER'S COST LEASE - CUM - SALE DEED FOR A PERIOD OF 10 YEARS IN RESPECT OF PLOT NO. 113, BENGALURU IT PARK, DEVANAHALLI, BANGALORE, SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF BALANCE OF LAND COST OF RS.2,88,00,000/- AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Sri.Freud Richardson for Mis.Deepa.V, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri.Basavaraj.V.Sabarad, learned counsel for the respondent.Nos.1 and 2.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has prayed for a direction to the respondents to execute and register a lease cum sale deed for a period of 10 years in respect of plot No.113, Bengaluru IT Park, Devenahalli, Bangalore subject to payment of balance of land costs of Rs.2,88,00,000/-.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the subsequent government order, the petitioner is entitled to the allotment of the plot in question for a period of 10 years. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that in case the petitioner approaches the respondents with regard to his grievance, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner submits the representation for allotment of the land in question on the basis of the subsequent government order to the competent authority of the respondent within three weeks from today, the competent authority of the respondent shall decide the application which may be filed by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of such a representation. Till the representation is submitted by the petitioner is decided, ad interim order granted by a Bench of this Court dated 24.03.2015 shall continue. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS