SYED AFSAR PASHA Vs. TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayer:

(2.) It is the contention of the petitioner that the father of the 2nd respondent - Syed Gaffar Sab Urf H.S.Gaffar Sab, was allotted with a shop premises belonging to the 1st respondent-City Municipal Council, Hassan Town, Hassan, during the year 1987. However, it is further contended that since the 2nd respondent and his father were not able to utilize the shop premises, they put the petitioner in possession of the shop premises in the year 1993. Thereafter, the petitioner continued to pay the lease rent to the Municipality. However, from the year 2000, the Municipality stopped collecting the rental from the petitioner. The Municipality got a notification published in the newspaper on 22.05.2006 stating that the shop premises which were leased to the lease holders would be granted absolutely in their favour by collecting the market value of the premises. Since it was brought to the knowledge of the petitioner that the Municipality was executing the sale deed in favour of the 2nd respondent, he got a legal notice issued on 13.06.2006, claiming that he is the lease holder of the shop premises bearing Municipal khatha No.47/58 situated at Jail Field, B.M.Road, Hassan, measuring 20 x 15 feet, the said shop should be sold in favour of the petitioner and not in favour of the 2nd respondent. Nevertheless, the Municipality went ahead and made an allotment in favour of the 2nd respondent on 12.01.2007 and thereafter executed an absolute sale deed under a registered document dated 27.07.2012.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had in fact filed a suit in O.S.No.184/2006, which was later renumbered as O.S.No.487/2010, before the Civil Court at Hassan seeking a relief of permanent injunction against the respondent-Municipality. It is submitted that the 2nd respondent impleaded himself in the said suit. It is also submitted that during the course of the proceedings the civil Court had granted an order of status quo and therefore it is submitted that the petitioner continued to be in occupation of the of the shop premises. However, at the instance of the petitioner the suit was dismissed as withdrawn on 05.07.2012, granting liberty to the petitioner to file fresh suit on the same cause of action. Nevertheless, instead of filing a suit, this writ petition is filed.