- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 14204 OF 2018 (LB-RES) BETWEEN: SRI. C THAMMAIAH S/O LATE SRI CHANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT NO.26/A, HIG SHARADADEVI NAGARJA (BOGADI 3RD PHASE) NEAR GANAPATHI TEMPLE MYSORE-570 022 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. R B SADASIVAPPA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA DR B R AMBEDKAR BEEDHI BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(MUDA) MYSORE-570005. 3. THE SECTION OFFICER-II MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY(MUDA) MYSORE-570005. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHANDINI SINGH., HCGP FOR R1; SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3) Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 25.05.2013 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs; a. “Issue writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 25.05.2013 passed by the 2nd respondent herein bearing No. MY.NA.PRA/LP/193/Vol./01/2013-14 vide Annexure-F. b. Direct the 2nd respondent to execute registered sale deed in favour of the Petitioner with respect to the house allotted to the Petitioner and which is in occupation of the Petitioner after collecting the balance amount. c. And grant such other order or directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit under the circumstances of the case, to protect the interest of the Petitioner, in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Flat/Apartment No.26/A, HIG (High Income Group), situated at Sharadadevi Nagara (Old Bhogadi 3rd Phase), near Ganapathi Temple, Mysore, had been - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 allotted to the Petitioner, and he has been in possession from the year 1992, the allotment having been made for a sum of Rs.2,19,000/-. The Petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.20,000/- and thereafter has applied to the LIC Housing Finance Limited for loan to make payment of the balance amount. The LIC inspected the premises and refused to process the application on the ground that the apartment was not fit for occupation. In that background that the Petitioner did not make payment of the due amount. 3. A representation having been made to the Respondents for the execution of the sale deed that the Respondents have indicated that if the allotment value was paid, the sale deed would be executed. In that background the Petitioner did not go ahead and make payment, and the matter continued in abeyance. Finally, in the year 2018, the Respondents had issued an intimation letter cancelling the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 allotment on the ground of non-payment of the amounts. It is challenging the same, the Petitioner had approached this Court seeking for the aforesaid reliefs. 4. The submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner is that if the loan had been sanctioned by the LIC Housing Finance Limited, the Petitioner would have made payment of the balance amount. It is only on account of the rejection of the loan application that the Petitioner could not make payment of the amount. 5. Sri T.P.Vivekananda, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the alleged cause of rejection that the apartment was not fit for habitation, is not correct. Inasmuch as the Petitioner having forcefully occupied and continued to reside in the apartment, the Petitioner cannot seek to take advantage of the alleged rejection. The possession in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 this case, though not handed over voluntarily, the Petitioner himself had occupied the apartment. 6. In that background, this Court had called upon the Petitioner to make his submission as to whether the Petitioner was willing to make payment of the current market value of the subject apartment to save this allotment inasmuch as the Petitioner has continued to stay in the apartment for the last several decades. 7. Today, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that he is ready to make payment of the current value of the property as per the guidance value. 8. Learned counsel for the Respondents on instructions submits that the guidance value being ₹26,000/- per square meter and the total amount for the apartment being ₹26,91,000/-. If the said amount were paid, the Respondents would execute the necessary sale deed within a period of 30 days of the said payment being made. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 9. The said submission answers the grievance of the Petitioner inasmuch as the Petitioner himself is ready to make payment of the current guidance value. As such, I pass the following ORDER i) Writ petition is allowed. ii) A certiorari is issued, the impugned order dated 25.05.2013 passed by respondent No.2 at Annexure-F, is quashed. iii) Liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make payment of the current guidance value of the apartment of ₹26,000/- per square meter, totaling ₹26,91,000/-. Once such payment is made, respondent No.2 is directed to execute the necessary sale deed in respect of the aforesaid apartment within a period of 30 days of receipt of the amounts. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4359 WP No. 14204 of 2018 iv) Once such payment is made, any and all proceedings filed by either of the parties against each other would necessarily have to be withdrawn. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE KTY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5