Facts
The petitioner’s late husband was allotted Site No. B5-SH-2510 in Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout on 19 December 2016, subject to payment of the balance sital value of ₹4,57,626.
Source reference: p. 2He did not pay the balance; the petitioner stated that the allotment letter and subsequent steps had not been communicated to him.
Source reference: p. 2After his death, she sought transfer of the allotment and permission to pay the balance.
Source reference: p. 2Following an earlier writ petition directing the BDA to consider her representations, the BDA cancelled the allotment on 15 May 2023 for non-payment.
Source reference: p. 2–4The petitioner challenged that cancellation and sought restoration of the allotment.
Source reference: p. 2–4During the present proceedings, the parties acknowledged the State Government’s order dated 15 March 2024 permitting specified allottees in the 2016 and 2018 allotment years to pay the outstanding balance with 12% annual interest.
Source reference: p. 5–6Issues
1. Whether the BDA’s cancellation of the allotment for non-payment should be set aside in light of the State Government’s order dated 15 March 2024.
Source reference: p. 4–62. Whether the petitioner, as the allottee’s legal heir, was entitled to restoration of the allotment and an opportunity to pay the balance sital value with interest and obtain conveyance.
Source reference: p. 2, 5–7Law Applied
The Court applied the State Government’s order dated 15 March 2024, which permitted payment of the balance sital value with interest at 12% per annum by qualifying allottees of sites in Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout allotted in 2016 and 2018.
Source reference: p. 5–6The judgment also referred to the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984, particularly in relation to payment of delayed amounts, but did not identify a specific rule or statutory provision.
Source reference: p. 5No judicial precedent was cited.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The petitioner’s husband’s allotment was made in 2016, bringing it within the category covered by the State Government’s order.
Source reference: p. 6The respondents did not dispute that the order permitted the relevant allottees to pay the outstanding sital value with 12% annual interest.
Source reference: p. 6The Court therefore held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of that order, and that the non-payment basis for cancellation did not prevent restoration on the terms now available under it.
Source reference: p. 6–7Holding
The petition was allowed and the cancellation order dated 15 May 2023 was quashed.
The BDA was directed to restore the allotment, issue an allotment letter in the petitioner’s name, and accept the balance sital value with 12% annual interest from the date it became due until payment.
Source reference: p. 6–7The petitioner must pay within two weeks of the demand notice.
Source reference: p. 6–7Upon receipt of payment, the BDA must execute an absolute sale deed in her favour; the site must not be allotted to anyone else pending completion.
Source reference: p. 6–7The directions are to be completed within three months after payment.
Source reference: p. 6–7Original Court PDF
SMT. R. SHWETHAvsTHE COMMISSIONER
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
