S MANJULA W/O LATE S. SRINIVAS Vs. MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REP. BY ITS COMSSIONER, JHANSI LAXSHMI BAI ROAD, MYSORE - 570 001

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has sought for quashing the endorsement Annexure -A dialed 4.6.2011. issued by the respondent.

(2.) THE records reveal that one Krishna Murthy was allotted site No. 10677 measuring (sic) mts x 9mts (approximately 20 x 30 ft) situated at Vijayanagar 4th Stage, 2nd Phase. Mysore as per the allotment letter vide Annexure -B dated 31.7.1998 by the respondent. The said allottee paid the (sic)al value in instalments upto 6.6.2003. Ultimately, a sale deed came to be issued in favour of Krishna Murthy as per Annexure -D dated 4.5.2005 conveying right, title and interest over the said site in favour of Krishna Murthy, Sri, Krishna Murthy, after purchase of the site, paid the taxes etc., Subsequently, he sold the very site m favour of the petitioner through registered sale deed dated 24.5.2005 as per Annexure -G. Thus, the petitioner is the owner is in possession of the said site bearing No. 10677 measuring 6 mts x 9mts (20 x 30 ft). After taking possession of the said site, khata was changed in the name of the petitioner. However, later, the petitioner came to know that the site bearing No.10677, which was allotted in favour of Krishna Murthy purchased by the petitioner is actually measuring 30 x. 40 ft and not 20 x 30 ft(as found in the records). Thus it is clear that the petitioner is in possession of a bigger site than the actual allotment In view of the same, the petitioner being law abiding citizen made an application praying for allotment of alternative site or for regularising the very site in favour of the petitioner. Said application is rejected by the respondent on the ground that the original allottee did not pay the (sic)ital value within the prescribed period of 90 days and, therefore he should not have been allotted the said site.

(3.) BE trial as it may, the fact remains that the original allottee was allotted sits bearing No.10677 measuring 6 mts x 9mts (20 x 30 ft) and the petitioner has purchased the very extent of the site by paying requisite amount Neither the allottee nor the petitioner has paid the sale consideration in respect of site measuring 30 x 40 ft. Thus in law, what is conveyed in favour of the allottee as well as the petitioner site, measuring 20 x 30 ft, In view of the same, the petitioner needs to be allotted alternative site measuring 20 x 30 ft, preferably in the same locality. If in any event, site measuring 20 x 30 ft is not available in the area in question, the petitioner shall be allotted, site of equal dimension in any of the neighbouring areas in a layout which is formed during the relevant period.