- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS WRIT PETITION NO. 1739 OF 2025 (BDA) BETWEEN: SRI. JOHN BARNABAS, S/O JOHN ANTONY, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.264, 3RD MAIN ROAD, DC HALLI, BEGUR ROAD, DUO HEIGHTS, RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 068. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R.P. SOMASHEKHARAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 002. 2. THE DEPUTY SECRETARY-4, BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARA PARK WEST EXTENSION, BENGALURU - 560 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE Digitally signed by JUANITA THEJESWINI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 ENDORSEMENT DATED 22.10.2024 BEARING NO.BEMAPRA.UKA-4/4491/2024-25 UNDER ANNEXURE-K ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R DEVDAS ORAL ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned endorsement dated 22.10.2024 at Annexure-K issued by respondent No.2/Deputy Secretary-4, Bangalore Development Authority, declining to execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioner. 2. A brief background of the case is that one Smt.Ishwari Thakkar was allotted a 'B' type apartment bearing flat No. 1220 situated at the III Floor of the apartment complex put up by the Bangalore Development Authority at Austin Town, 2nd Stage layout, Bengaluru. A lease-cum-sale agreement was executed on 30.11.1982 and registered on 03.12.1982 in favour of Smt.Ishwari Thakkar by the Bangalore Development Authority. In - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 terms of the conditions imposed in the Lease-cum-Sale agreement, the lessee is put in possession of the apartment for a period of fifteen years commencing from 30.11.1982. It is also stated that in the event the lessee pays the tentative costs of the land and flat within the period of this lease, the lessor will execute the sale deed in respect of the apartment only after the expiry of the period of five years. However, Smt.Ishwari Thakkar, executed an Irrevocable General Power of Attorney along with an Agreement of Sale and an affidavit in favour of the petitioner on 20.09.1991. It is contended that Smt.Ishwari Thakkar passed away on 26.09.2009. The petitioner, who is in possession of the apartment, approached the respondent-BDA on 11.10.2017 seeking execution of the sale deed in his favour. On 21.06.2018, respondent No.2 issued an endorsement directing the petitioner to submit the relevant documents in respect of the apartment. On 21.06.2018, the petitioner herein furnished all the relevant documents, including the letter of Allotment, Notice, Lease-cum-Sale Agreement, Irrevocable General Power of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 Attorney, Agreement of Sale, Affidavit and Encumbrance Certificates. By a communication dated 15.06.2019, the petitioner herein wrote to respondent No.2 that he had paid a sum of Rs.81,341/- under challan bearing No. No.4784 dated 15.06.2019. The copy of the BDA remittance challan is found at Annexure-H1. Despite all these transactions and the payment made by the petitioner, now the impugned endorsement at Annexure-K has been issued by respondent No. 2, declining to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner, and a direction is issued to the petitioner to approach a competent Civil Court to get a declaration of title. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to place reliance on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Limited Vs. State of Haryana and Another reported in (2012) 1 SCC 656, to contend that although the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that transactions such as Sale Agreements, General Powers of Attorney, and Will - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 Transactions do not convey any title nor create any interest in an immovable property. Nevertheless, it is directed that if there are such transactions entered before the passing of the judgment, they may be relied upon to apply for regularization of allotments/leases at the hands of the development authorities. It was also made clear that if such documents have been acted upon at the hands of the development authorities or municipalities or revenue authorities, they need not be disturbed merely on account of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel would therefore submit that in terms of the said judgment, the petitioner is entitled to have a sale deed executed, since the Agreement of Sale, General Power of Attorney, and affidavit were executed by Smt. Ishwari Thakkar on 20.09.1991, long before the judgment was rendered in the case of Suraj Lamps (supra). 4. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.K.Krishna, appearing for the respondent-BDA, contends that the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held that such transactions under General Powers of Attorney/Sale Agreements/Will Transactions do not convey any title nor do they create any interest in an immovable property. Moreover, there is a clear condition imposed in the Lease- cum-Sale Agreement that the lessee shall not assign, sublet, or part with the possession of the whole or any part of the scheduled premises without the prior written permission of the lessor. It is therefore contended that respondent No.2 has rightly directed the petitioner to approach the civil Court and obtain a declaration which would enable the respondents to execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioner. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent-BDA and on perusing the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that the learned counsel for the petitioner has made out a case for issuing necessary directions to the respondent-BDA. The Hon'ble Supreme - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 Court in the case of Suraj Lamps (supra) has clearly held that it is a well-settled legal position that the Sale Agreements/General Power of Attorney/Will Transactions are not 'transfers' or 'sales' and that such transactions cannot be treated as completed transfers or conveyences. They can continue to be treated as existing Agreements of Sale. Nevertheless, insofar as the allotments made at the hands of the development authorities, such as the BDA (in that case it was the Delhi Development Authority), the Apex Court has directed that if such transactions have happened prior to the passing of the judgment at the hands of the Apex Court, they may be relied upon to apply for regularization of allotments/leases made at the hands of the developed authorities. It was also made clear that all such transactions, if acted upon by authorities such as the development authorities, municipalities, or revenue authorities, they need not be disturbed merely on account of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the year 2012. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 6. On facts, it is also clear that the respondent- BDA has also made all efforts to contact and communicate with Smt.Ishwari Thakkar, but no information is available regarding the legal representatives of Smt.Ishwari Thakkar. The petitioner has with him the original Allotment Letter, the registered Lease-cum-Sale Agreement dated 30.11.1982, which is a clear indication that Smt.Ishwari Thakkar has parted with the documents in favour of the petitioner and has parted the possession of the apartment in favour of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a case where a law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court can be made applicable. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsement at Annexure-K dated 22.10.2024 issued by respondent No. 2/Deputy Secretary-4 is hereby quashed and set aside. A writ of mandamus is hereby issued to the respondents to execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioner pursuant to the representation given by - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:13895 WP No. 1739 of 2025 the petitioner while collecting all the necessary fees and registration and stamp duty. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (R DEVDAS) JUDGE rv CT: BHK