Smt. H.B. Mythra vs Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA)

B.S. Patil

In this writ petition, petitioner is challenging the orders dated 15.09.2001 and 08.11.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Mysore Urban Development Authority. A direction is also sought against the respondent to issue possession certificate and to execute a registered sale deed in respect of Site No. 862 situated at 4th Stage, Vijayanagar, Mysore.

The undisputed facts reveal that petitioner had applied for allotment of a site pursuant to the notification issued by the respondent. On 28.08.1998. a site measuring 50 ft. x 80 ft. bearing No. 862 came to be allotted in favour of the petitioner. She was called upon to pay 15% of the sital value. The petitioner paid the said amount in a sum of Rs. 35,000/- in the month of December 1998 in two installments. Another sum of Rs. 35,000/- was paid in the year 1999. However, as the petitioner did not pay the entire site value, a notice was issued on 22.11.2000 calling upon the petitioner to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- together with interest at 18% within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice.

As per the assertions made by the petitioner, she paid the entire amount along with interest in four installments on 01.01.2001, 12.01.2001, 16.01.2001 and 18.01.2001. In fact, these payments are evidenced by the challans produced by the petitioner vide Annexures-G to K. However, without noticing these payments, a notice came to be issued on 15.09.2001 canceling the allotment of the site on the ground that the petitioner had failed to pay the amount.

According to the petitioner, this cancellation order was not served on her. The petitioner continued to make representation to the respondent seeking issue of possession certificate and for execution of the sale deed. The respondent issued an endorsement on 08.11.2011 informing that her claim for possession certificate could not be considered in view of the fact that the balance amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- along with interest was not paid pursuant to the notice issued. In this background the petitioner has rushed to this Court challenging the cancellation order and the endorsement issued.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel representing the respondent-Mysore Urban Development Authority.

The payment of entire sale consideration made even before the order of cancellation was passed is evidenced by the challans. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not deny the said payments made. Indeed, it is his submission that inadvertently, the Authorities have not noticed the payments made and therefore the impugned cancellation order came to be issued under a mistaken impression.

In the light of the above submission and the records produced showing the payment of sale consideration, this writ petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned endorsement dated 08.11.2011 vide Annexure-A and the order of cancellation dated 15.09.2001 vide Annexure-P are set aside. The respondent is directed to put the petitioner in possession of the property and execute necessary sale deed in respect of the site in question expeditiously.