Smt.Lakshmamma v. State of Karnataka

((((((((((((HC-KAR, NC:(2026:KHC:42822( WP(No.(33179(of(2024( ( ,,,,,,,,,, , CNR:(KAHC010667342024( ( ( IN(THE(HIGH(COURT(OF(KARNATAKA(AT(BENGALURU( TH DATED(THIS(THE(12 (DAY(OF(AUGUST,(2026(

BEFORE(

THE(HON'BLE(MR.(JUSTICE(SURAJ(GOVINDARAJ(

WRIT(PETITION(NO.(33179(OF(2024((GM-RES)(

BETWEEN:((

(

1., SMT.LAKSHMAMMA, 55,YEARS, W/O,SRI,C,RAMASWAMY, RESIDING,AT,NO.C-20,

RD3 ,MAIN,ROAD,,GROUND,FLOOR,, LALITAMAHAL,NAGARA,ALANAHALLI,, MYSURU-570,028, …,PETITIONER, (BY,SRI.,P,A,KULKARNI.,,ADVOCATE), AND:(

(

1., STATE,OF,KARNATAKA, BY,ITS,PRINCIPAL,SECRETARY,, DEPARTMENT,OF,HOUSING,ROOM,NO.213,, II,FLOOR,,VIKASA,SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560,001, Digitallytisigned ,by0SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA 2., RAJIV,GANDHI,RURAL,HOUSING,,

Location:0HIGH CORPORATION,LIMITED,(RGRHCL), COURT0OF WITH,ITS,REGISTERED,OFFICE,AT,, KARNATAKA CAUVERY,BHAVAN, TH9 ,FLOOR,,C,AND,F,BLOCK, K,G,ROAD, BENGALURU-560,009, BY,ITS,MANAGING,DIRECTOR, …,RESPONDENTS, (BY,SRI.,SHAMANTH,NAIK,,AGA,FOR,R1;, ,,,,,,SMT.,SHILPA,RANI,,ADVOCATE,FOR,R2), , , THIS,W.P.,IS,FILED,UNDER,ARTICLES,226,AND,227,OF,THE, CONSTITUTION,OF,INDIA,,PRAYING,TO,DIRECT,THE,RESPONDENTS, TO,RETURN,THE,AMOUNT,RECEIVED,FROM,THE,PETITIONER,TO,THE,

TUNE OF RS. 15,10,000/- (RUPEES FIFTEEN LAKHS AND TEN THOUSAND ONLY) ALONG WITH A MINIMUM OF 18% INTEREST FORTHWITH AND ETC.

THIS 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

¶1The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to return the amount received from the petitioner to the tune of Rs.15,10,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs and Ten Thousand only) along with a minimum of 18% interest forthwith.

b. Grant such other relief/s as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstance of the case.

¶2A scheme was propounded by the State Government, which is notified in the Prajavani newspaper on

19.09.2010, inviting applications which would be chosen on a lottery basis for allotment of flats in the said scheme for construction of one lakh housing scheme in Bangalore.

¶3The petitioner was informed that she had been allotted Flat No.37, 'C' Block, Ground Floor, at Talaguppa, Ramanagara District, and an allotment letter was issued on 08.01.2012. Initially, the petitioner was called upon to pay a sum of

Rs.5,25,000/-. Subsequently, by communication dated 04.12.2021, the petitioner was informed that the revised value of the flat was Rs.15,10,000/-. Thereafter, by another communication dated

19.08.2022, the petitioner was informed that the final value of the flat was Rs.13,25,000/-. The petitioner had initially paid a sum of Rs.2,88,500/- and thereafter paid a further sum of Rs.12,21,500/- on 11.03.2022, which was much prior to the communication dated 19.08.2022, whereby the value of the flat was reduced.

¶4Though the aforesaid amounts had been received by the respondents, the respondents failed to complete the construction of the aforesaid project. The petitioner followed up with the respondents and sought handing over of the allotted apartment/flat. However, as the apartment/flat was not ready, the same was not handed over to the petitioner. It is in that background, the petitioner had submitted a representation seeking refund of the monies paid by her to the respondents. The said amount has also not been refunded, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the aforesaid reliefs.

¶5When the matter was taken up for hearing learned counsel for respondents had submitted that there are

various other projects which have been developed by the respondent and if the petitioner were interested, one of those apartments/flats could be allotted to the petitioner. It is in that background that the details were provided to the petitioner who had gone and visited the said apartments and found them unsuitable for their requirements. It is in that background that Sri.P.A.Kulkarni., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the apartments not being suitable, refund of their monies with interest at 18% be ordered.

¶6Undisputably, the respondent has not completed the project towards which the monies were paid. Though there are several reasons or justifications made out as regards pending litigation and/or the like, the fact remains that the respondent has not completed the project, despite the petitioner having paid the monies way back in the year 2022.

¶7On the basis of the facts and records, it is also unlikely that the said project would be taken up and completed in a reasonable period of time and it is in that background that the petitioner is not interested in continuing with the allotment made by the respondent but would seek to withdraw the amounts and buy an apartment/flat elsewhere. There can be

no fault found with the prudence exhibited by the petitioner in doing so, when the mistake is with the respondent in not completing the project. In that view of the matter, this Court passes the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. A mandamus is issued, directing respondents to return the amount advanced by the petitioner with 6% interest per annum calculated from the respective dates on which the amounts were paid till the date of refund of the amounts. iii. Needless to say, the petitioner would have to place on record before the respondents the details of the payments made with appropriate proof of such payments, as also execute such document as my be necessary and comply with all formalities. iv. Respondents shall consider the said documents and refund the monies within a period of 30 days of the said documents having been submitted by the petitioner, along with interest as aforestated. Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35