JOSEPH RAJ Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is knocking at the doors of Writ Court essentially for a direction to the Respondent-BDA to execute & register a conveyance in terms of specific Performance decree in his suit in O.S.No.6825/2011 decreed on 10/11/2014 against his vendor who happened to be the allottee of subject site at the hands of the BDA. Learned counsel for the Petitioner vehemently argues that the Respondents are not justified in not taking cognizance of the said decree and acting in accordance with the same.

(2.) After service of notice, the State has entered appearance through the learned AGA; the BDA & BBMP have entered appearance through their learned Panel Advocates. The BDA has filed a Statement of Objection on 12/7/2022 resisting the Writ Petition. Its Sr. Panel Counsel makes vehement submission for the dismissal of Petition contending that his client was not a party to the decree in question; the said decree was obtained ex parte qua the allottee of site in question; no explanation is offered for not arraying the BDA as a defendant; no Possession Certificate was ever issued to the allottee, though sital cost was remitted by him to the BDA in terms of Allotment Letter.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the Petition Papers, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence in the matter as under and for the following reasons: