G.S.KRISHNAMURTHY vs Commissioner, B.D.A.

AFTER hearing the complainant and the learned Counsel for respondent and perusing the records, the Commission delivered the following:

THE complainant''s site bearing No. 48 situated in Gavipura, Bangalore North Taluk was part of Sy. THE complainant under registered Sale Deed dated 31.5.1958 had purchased No. 38/1 and it. THE said site was acquired by B.D.A. in 1969 and compensation was awarded. As the compensation was meagre, the complainant prayed for allotment of an alternate site. THE respondent on 29.2.1968 allotted site No. 969 in Banasankari I Stage to the complainant. He was required to pay Rs. 3,467/- paid by his as initial deposit within two months from that date. THE BDA cancelled the said allotment. Hence he has filed this complaint for a direction to the BDA to allot an alternate site to him or to award compensation to him. The complaint is resisted by the respondent by contending inter alia that as the complainant failed to pay the balance amount of the site, in respect of the cost price of the site, the allotment was cancelled by the respondent and that the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed by him. The respondent has also contended that the claim of the complainant is time barred.

From the allotment order produced by the complainant himself, it is clear that he was required to pay the balance of the cost price of the site on or before 28.5.1968. It is also fairly admitted by the Learned Counsel for the complainant that the complainant failed to pay the said amount within that time. Whether the complainant had not given any reason for failure to deposit the amount, is immaterial because the respondent had not extended the time for payment. Under the circumstances, the respondent was justified in cancelling the allotment order. In that event, the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed by him in the complaint. The allotment order was cancelled by the BDA on 12.10.1970. Hence the claim of the complainant is also time barred. In that view of the matter also the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed by him in the complaint.

IN the result, the complainant is dismissed. Under the circumstances, we direct the parties to bear their own costs. The Commission will be happy, if the complainant is allotted a site, as his land was acquired by the BDA in 1969 and no compensation has been paid to him so far. Complaint dismissed.