Karnataka High Court

WA/1803/2025 of BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs SMT. PRANESHWARI P K on 8 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

CNR: KAHC010729122025 NC: 2026:KHC:48618-DB WA No. 1803 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1803 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: 1.

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

WRIT APPEAL NO. 1803 OF 2025 (BDA)

BETWEEN:

1.

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

KUMARA KRUPA ROAD

BANGALORE - 560 020

REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. SACHIN B.S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

SMT. PRANESHWARI P.K.

W/O SHRI O. KASTURAPPA

AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

R/O NO 720, "KASTURI TILAKA"

III A CROSS, HRBR LAYOUT

1ST BLOCK, KALYAN NAGAR

BENGALURU - 560 043

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI SAGAR B.B., ADVOCATE)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE

IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07/01/2025 PASSED BY LEARNED

SINGLE JUDGE IN WRIT PETITION NO. 39821/2018 (BDA) AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

Digitally

signed by

SRIDEVI S

Location:

High Court

of Karnataka

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

and

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The Bangalore Development Authority [BDA] has filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP.No.39821/2018 (BDA).

2. The present appeal has been filed after an inordinate delay of 273 days. The respondent had filed the said writ petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to BDA to allot the site bearing No.1158 at 6th Stage, 4th 'B' Block, in further extension of Banashankari 6th phase, in terms of the allotment letter dated 01.02.2004 or any other alternative site at the same rate.

3. The writ petitioner was allotted the said site under a letter of allotment dated 01.02.2004 for a total sale consideration of `7,56,000/-. The writ petitioner had paid the initial deposit of `37,800/- on 16.10.2003, and was required to pay the balance amount within a period of 60 days from the date of allotment, that is, by 01.04.2004. The BDA states that under the Rules, the

HC-KAR

pay the balance amount with interest at the rate of 18% for the first 30 days and 21% for the further 30 days. Thus, according to the BDA, the entire consideration was required to be paid on or before 01.04.2004.

4. The writ petitioner sought an extension to make the payment and finally made it on 06.09.2004. However, the BDA cancelled the allotment on 30.11.2004.

5. The learned Single Judge had directed the BDA to clarify whether the site in question was still available or was allotted to another person. BDA reported that the site in question was not allotted to any other person. In the aforesaid view, the learned Single Judge passed an order directing the BDA to inform the writ petitioner of the interest amount that would be payable for the delay in payment of the amount and subject to the writ petitioner paying the amount to complete the formalities and allot the site.

6. As noted above, BDA has filed this appeal after an inordinate delay of 273 days. It has filed an application seeking condonation of delay, which is supported by an affidavit explaining the delay by stating that after receiving the entire file from the advocate, the

HC-KAR

concerned officer put up the file to obtain a legal opinion and, after securing the legal opinion, decided to file an appeal. It is stated that thereafter, the file was sent to the land acquisition section for confirmation to prefer an appeal, where it was confirmed that the appeal would be filed. However, the file was mixed up with another file and was not traceable. It states after a thorough search of records, the BDA officials had found some part of the records and steps were taken to entrust the case to a panel advocate. After drafting the appeal, the documents in Kannada were given for translation. After securing the translated documents, the appeal was filed. The explanation does not provide any specific details as to the dates on which the files were sent; when the opinion was obtained; when the decision to file the appeal was taken; when the part of the file was found; the period during which the files were lost; the date on which the documents were forwarded to the panel advocate; the date when the writ appeal was finally drafted, and the dates when the translation of documents was obtained. The application merely sets out bald averments without substantiating the same.

HC-KAR

7. In view of the above, we are not persuaded to allow the said application; hence, the same is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as well.

8. The pending application stands disposed of.

Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

sd List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead