- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:7458 WP No. 45700 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA WRIT PETITION NO. 45700 OF 2019 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. APPAJI GOWDA S/O. LATE HULLURE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/AT NO. 5-AS, 1ST CROSS, 2ND PHASE, 4TH BLOCK, BANASHANKARI III STAGE, BANGALORE-560 085. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MURALI B S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE RAMANAGARA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ABIVRUDDI BHAVANA, B.M. ROAD, RAMANAGARA-562 159, REPRESENTED BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA., DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA., BANGALORE-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHENDRA.G., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI.BOPANNA BELLIAPPA., AGA FOR R-2) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS PERTAINING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 16.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-H AND QUASH THE SAME AND CONSEQUENTLY, QUASH THE Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:7458 WP No. 45700 of 2019 IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT DATED 11.07.2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-K, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA ORAL ORDER 1. These facts are not in dispute: 2. On 29.09.2012, the site bearing No.582 was sold in a public auction by the respondent – authority and the petitioner was the highest bidder having bid a sum of Rs.26 lakhs. The petitioner, as required under the Rules, paid 25% of the bid amount immediately. 3. Under the Rules, he had 45 days to make the balance payment without any interest and beyond this period of 45 days i.e., after 30.11.2012, he could make the payment with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. till the period of 90 days. 4. Further, as per the Rules, beyond this period of 90 days, for a further period of 30 days i.e., till - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:7458 WP No. 45700 of 2019 10.02.2013, he could pay the balance with interest at the rate of 21% p.a. 5. However, the petitioner did not deposit the amount with interest till 10.02.2013, but ultimately deposited the amount on 10.04.2013. The authority accepted this amount and did not take any steps to either return the amount or to cancel the auction. 6. However, after a period of six years i.e., on 16.02.2019, the authorities issued the impugned order stating that it would be unable to confirm the auction since the amount was not paid within the time stipulated under the Rules. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay in payment is essentially only for a period of 58 days from the last date permitted under the Rules and the petitioner would be willing to pay interest at the rate prescribed within the stipulated date i.e., for the payment which ought to have been made before 10.02.2013 and for the period beyond said date, at - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:7458 WP No. 45700 of 2019 the rate which this Court may stipulate and that the petitioner would also be prepared to pay interest on this interest component which he has not paid from 10.04.2013 till the date of payment at the rate which may be fixed by this Court. An affidavit of undertaking is also filed by the petitioner in this regard. 8. In my view, having regard to the fact that the authority had accepted the amount belatedly deposited by the petitioner and retained the amount for more than six years thereby giving him the distinct impression that they had accepted the sale, it would be appropriate to direct the authority to accept the balance amount with interest as provided under the Rules up to 10.02.2013 and from the period beyond 10.02.2013 till 10.04.2013 i.e., for the period of 58 days, interest at the rate of 21%. 9. The petitioner shall also be liable to pay interest at the rate of 21% on the interest component of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:7458 WP No. 45700 of 2019 auction bid amount from 10.04.2013 till the date of payment i.e., on or before 01.03.2025. 10. Though in the normal circumstances, the claim of any auction purchaser to deposit the amount belatedly would not be entertained, in the peculiar facts of this case i.e., the fact that the authority retained the entire amount for more than six years, the present order is being passed. 11. It must be observed here that there is a lapse on the part of the authority in retaining the amount for six years and if this withholding of amount for six long years is held to be unfair, the authority would be liable to refund the amount and also pay interest on the said amount, which in the ultimate analysis, would affect the public exchequer. 12. Therefore, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the affidavit of undertaking filed by the petitioner that he would pay interest at the rates provided under the Rules till 10.04.2013 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:7458 WP No. 45700 of 2019 and a further direction to pay interest at 21% on the interest component from 11.04.2013 till the date of payment, it would sub-serve the interest of justice if the authority is directed to accept the said amount as directed above. 13. As a consequence, Annexures-H and K shall stand quashed. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. 14. Notwithstanding the petition has been disposed of, re-list this matter on 03.03.2025 for the petitioner to report compliance of payment. If the payment is not made, it is made clear that this order would be recalled and the writ petition would be dismissed. Sd/- (N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51