M/S Dhariwal Lifespaces PVT LTD vs. Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Dhariwal Lifespaces Pvt Ltd, along with M/s Shankaeshwar Landmark LLP, filed a writ petition challenging Bye-laws No. 3.9 of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) Building Bye-laws 2003. They also sought to quash a demand notice dated March 8, 2021, issued by the Joint Director, Town Planning (South), BBMP. The demand notice required payment of Rs. 29,65,986/- towards ground rent and Rs. 5,33,878/- towards GST on the said ground rent and other charges. The petitioner sought a declaration that the bye-laws were unconstitutional, illegal, and ultra vires, and sought to quash the demand notice.
Held
The Court held that the issues raised in the present writ petition were squarely covered by previous binding decisions of coordinate benches. Specifically, in the cases of 'M/s Sapthagiri Shelters' and 'Sunderam Shetty', similar levies of ground rent, license fee, and other charges under the relevant bye-laws were declared ultra vires the Act and quashed. The Court noted that in 'M/s Sapthagiri Shelters', Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, pertaining to Ground Rent, was also declared invalid. Consequently, the present petition did not warrant separate adjudication and was liable to be allowed in terms of the operative directions issued in the aforesaid writ petitions. The demand notice dated March 8, 2021, was set aside. The BBMP was directed to issue a fresh/modified plan and process the petitioner's application for a building license strictly in accordance with law. The issuance of the license and plan approval was not to be withheld due to any contemplated appeal by the BBMP, but would be subject to the outcome of any such appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether Bye-laws No. 3.9 of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws 2003 are unconstitutional, illegal, and ultra vires the governing Act? The petitioner argued that these bye-laws, which impose charges like ground rent, are beyond the scope of the powers conferred by the relevant Act and are therefore invalid. They relied on previous judgments where similar levies were struck down. The respondents, BBMP and the State of Karnataka, did not present arguments on this point in the judgment. 2. Whether the demand notice dated March 8, 2021, demanding ground rent and GST thereon, is liable to be quashed? The petitioner contended that since the basis for the demand (the bye-laws) is illegal, the consequential demand notice must also be quashed. The respondents did not present arguments on this issue.
Sections Cited
Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965, Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, Bye-laws No. 3.9 of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws 2003
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Caption petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:-
"a) issue a Writ or Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ of like nature or direction, declaring the Byelaws No.3.9 of the Bangalore Mahanagara Palike Building Bye-laws 2003 as unconstitutional, illegal and ultra vires. b) issue a Writ or Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ of like nature or direction, quashing the Demand Notice dated 08.03.2021 HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24137 bearing No. BBMP/Ad.Dir/JD South/0044/19-20 issued by Respondent No.3 demanding payment of Rs.29,65,986/- (Rupees Twenty Nine Lakhs Sixty Five Thousand Nine hundred and Eighty Six Only), towards Ground Rent and Rs.5,33,878/- (Rupees Five Lakhs thirty Three thousand eight hundred and seventy eight only) towards GST on the said ground rent and other charges referred therein at Annexure 'A'. c) Grant such other and further relief/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interests of justice and equity."
The Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, in W.P.No.23086/2022 and connected matters(herein referred to as “M/s Sapthagiri Shelters”) as well as W.P.No.36017/2018 and connected matters(herein referred to as “Sunderam Shetty”), have comprehensively adjudicated the issue involved and settled the controversy. In Sunderam Shetty and connected cases, the Co- ordinate Bench declared the levies of Ground Rent, License Fee, Building License Fee, and Scrutiny Fee under the relevant bye-laws as ultra vires the Act and quashed the HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24137 Government Circulars dated 04.09.2015, 27.01.2017, and 30.03.2017. Similarly, in M/s Sapthagiri Shelters and connected matters, the Co-ordinate Bench struck down the Karnataka Act No.01 of 2022 and Karnataka Act No.37 of 2024, holding that linking fees under Rule 37-A of the Karnataka Planning Authority Rules, 1965 to market/guidance value under Section 45-B of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 is illegal. It further quashed all related Circulars and declared Clause 3.8 of the BBMP Building Bye-laws, 2003, pertaining to Ground Rent, as invalid.
The issues raised in the present writ petition are squarely covered by the above binding decisions, wherein the relevant bye-laws and government circulars have been set aside.
In light of the authoritative pronouncements, the present petition does not warrant separate adjudication HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24137 and is liable to be allowed in terms of the operative directions issued in the aforesaid writ petitions.
Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed. (ii) The impugned demand notice dated 08.03.2021 issued by respondent No.3 as per Annexure-A is hereby set-aside. (iii) Respondent - BBMP is hereby directed to issue fresh/modified plan as the case may be. (iv) Respondent - BBMP is directed to forthwith process the petitioner’s application seeking building license and sanction of the building plan, strictly in accordance with law. (v) It is made clear that the issuance of the building license and approval of the plan shall not be withheld merely on the ground that the BBMP is contemplating to file an appeal against the reported judgment. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24137 (vi) If the building license and sanction plan are issued, the same shall be subject to the outcome of any appeal that may be filed by the BBMP against the said judgment.
Pending applications, if any, are also disposed off." (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
NG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 7
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.