Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Lakshmamma vs The Commissioner

High Court Of Karnataka|08 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION No.31423 OF 2018 (BDA) BETWEEN:
Smt. Lakshmamma, W/o B.M.Rangappa, Aged about 74 years, Residing at No.5, Byrappa Lane, Rana Singh Pet, Bengaluru-560 053.
(By Sri. H.C.Sundaresh, Advocate) AND:
The Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, T. Chowdaiah Road, Bangalore- 560 020.
(By Sri. M.N.Sudev Hegde, Advocate) …Petitioner …Respondent This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of The Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent to consider the representation filed by the petitioner, dated 29.02.2016 vide Annexure-D for accepting balance sital value with 21% interest and to execute sale deed in respect of the site baring No.79, measuring 20X30 situated at J.P.Nagar 9th Phase, 3rd Block, pursuant to the allotment letter issued by the respondent at Annexure-A and also per the resolution passed by the respondent in subject No.2013-04 vide Annexure-B.
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in ‘B’ Group this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioner the erstwhile allottee of BDA site is against non-consideration of his representation dated 29.02.2016 at Annexure-D. The learned counsel appearing for respondent-BDA graciously and fairly submits that the said representation shall be considered within three months, in accordance with law, if petitioner also co-operates by furnishing necessary data as may be solicited.
2. In view of the above, this Writ Petition succeeds in part; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent Nos.1 & 2 to consider petitioner’s representation dated 29.02.2016 at Annexure-D in accordance with law within a period of three months, and, further to make known to the petitioner the result of such consideration, forth with.
3. It is open to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to solicit any information or documents from the side of the petitioner as would be required for due consideration of her representation; however, no delay shall be brooked in that guise.
Costs made easy.
Sd/- JUDGE DS/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt Lakshmamma vs The Commissioner

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
08 February, 2019
Judges
  • Krishna S Dixit