IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.50329 OF 2018 (GM-ST-RN) BETWEEN:
SRI R. MANJUNATH S/o A. RAMAKRISHNAIAH AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT MANCHAPANAHALLI NANDAGUDI HOBLI HOSKOTE TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT … PETITIONER (BY SMT. G.M.SUMITHRA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K.H. SOMASEKHARA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE SUB-REGISTRAR HOSKOTE BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V. SHIVAREDDY, HCGP FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS WHICH ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN PASSING OF THE IMPUGEND ANNEXURE-A, QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.10.2018 MADE IN No.142/18-19 PASSED BY R-2 REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FOR CANCELLATION OF SALE AGREEMENT DATED 6.3.2003 VIDE ANNEXURE-A IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.09.2013 AND 16.12.2017 PASSED BY COURTS BELOW VIDE ANNEXURES-B AND C RESPECTIVELY AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Smt G.M.Sumithra, learned counsel for Sri K.H.Somasekhara, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Sri V.Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. The petition is admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this writ petition, petitioner, inter alia, has prayed for the following reliefs:
(b) Issue an order, direction or Writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated 1-10-2018 made in No.142/18-19 passed by the 2nd respondent rejecting the application of the petitioner for cancellation of sale agreement dated 6-3-2003 vide Annexure-“A” in view of the Judgment and Decree dated 29-8-2013 and 16-12-2017 passed by courts below vide Annexures-“B” and “C” respectively; and (c) Issue an order, direction or writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 29-9-2018 vide Annexure-“D” for cancellation of the agreement of sale dated 6-2-2003 as per the Judgment and Decree of both the courts rejecting the claim of the plaintiff for specific performance of the agreement dated 6-3-2003 vide Annexures-“B” and “C” respectively.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.2 may be directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 29-9-2018 in accordance with law and in the light of the order dated 04.06.2015 passed by the bench of this Court in W.P.No.51493/2014 (GM-ST/RN).
5. Sri V. Shivareddy, learned High Court Government Pleader submitted that suitable action in accordance with law shall be taken.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and in the facts of the case, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider the application of the petitioner dated 29.09.2018 by a speaking order and in the light of the order dated 04.06.2015 passed by the bench of this Court in W.P.No.51493/2014 (GM-ST/RN) without being influenced by the order dated 01.10.2018 made in No.142/18-19 passed by the 2nd respondent within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
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 cp*