CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 12 KAR CK 0110

R.N. Rajash Ekarachar vs The Director of Marketing APMC and The Secretary Agricultural Produce Market Committee

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 3 December 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Abdul Nazeer, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 38075 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 356 words
1.

Learned HCGP is directed to take notice for Respondent No. 1. Sri. H.K. Thimmegowda, learned Counsel is directed to take notice for Respondent No 2.

2.

The Petitioner was allotted a site bearing No. B-337 at APMC yard, Mysore. The Petitioner ought to have to put up construction on the said site within a period of one year from the date of execution of lease cum sale deed. Since the Petitioner failed to put up construction as above, Respondent No. 2 has passed an order dated 10.12.2008 as per Annexures-A forfeiting the site in question. The Petitioner has challenged the validity of the said order 10.12.2008 as per Annexure-A in this writ petition.

3.

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

4.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner could not put up construction on the said site in accordance with the terms and conditions of the scheme made under the provisions of the Act due to the reasons beyond his control He further submits that the Petitioner will put up construction on the said site in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said scheme within a period of one year.

5.

The submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is just and reasonable. In identical matters, this Court has granted an year''s time to the Petitioner therein to put up construction on the sites allotted by the APMC in accordance with the terms and conditions of the lease cum sale agreement. The Petitioner is also entitled for the similar order.

6.

In the result, the writ petition succeeds and is accordingly allowed. The order dated 10.12.2008 at Annexure-A is hereby quashed. The Petitioner is granted one year from today to put up construction on the site in question in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said scheme failing which liberty is reserved to the Respondents to take appropriate action against the Petitioner in accordance with law.

7.

Learned Advocates for the Respondents are permitted to file their vakalath/memo of appearance as the case may be within a period of six weeks from today. No costs.