MANU PROPERTIES PRIVATE LTD Vs. BANGLORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the auction notice dated 07. 06. 2002, Annexure-Q insofar as it relates to item No. 9 i. e. , 370, 4th Block, Koramangala. According to the petitioner, the said auction is illegal and arbitrary.

(2.) THE proceedings have a chequered career. Few facts are necessary to be stated to appreciate the controversy in question.

(3.) THE site in question which is a comer site was publicly auctioned on 14. 11. 1988. The petitioner was the highest bidder and offered rs. 2090 per sq. mtrs. aggregating to Rs. 8,46,817. 20ps. It is the case of the petitioner that he deposited a sum of Rs. 2. 12 lakhs towards 25% of the sale consideration. The balance of the sale consideration was required to be remitted within 45 days, i. e. , by 30. 12. 1988. On 06. 12. 1988, when the petitioner was to deposit the balance of sale consideration, there was an advertisement in the Deccan Herald stated to have been issued by the Executive Engineer of Bangalore development Authority to the effect that the sale held on 14. 11. 1988 stood cancelled since the said site was already auctioned in the year 1978 and one Sri M. Hanumanthu had purchased the site and is now the owner. Copy of the same is produced at Annexure-F. Bangalore development Authority issued a caution notice on 15. 12. 1988 i. e. , within a span of 9 days stating that the advertisement issued on 06. 12. 1988 was not issued from the office of the Bangalore development Authority nor from the office of the Executive Engineer and the same has been issued at the behest of certain persons with a view to knock of the valuable property. The Bangalore Development authority also reiterated that the auction held on 14. 11. 1988 in favour of the petitioner does not stand rescinded. Annexure-E is the subsequent notice issued by the Bangalore Development Authority. On 02. 06. 1989, the respondent Bangalore Development Authority confirmed the site in favour of the petitioner and also the receipt of rs. 2. 12 lakhs which is the initial deposit after the auction. The respondent-Bangalore Development Authority called upon the petitioner to deposit the balance of sale consideration of rs. 6,34,817. 20ps, a copy of the said communication is produced at annexure-A. The petitioner, pursuant to a letter dated 08. 07. 1989, brought these anomalies regarding the auction held on 14. 11. 1988 and the earlier alleged auction in the year 1978 and sought for return of the initial deposit of Rs. 2. 12 lakhs. The respondent reiterated that the site has not been sold in favour of Sri Hanumanthu and called upon the petitioner to remit the balance of the sale consideration. Incidentally, it is to be noticed that in the letter issued by the petitioner to the respondent, in no uncertain terms, a statement was made requesting the respondent to remit the initial deposit along with interest and also damages.