Smt Lakshmi Jayaram vs. State Of Karnataka
Held
The Court allowed the petitioners' request to withdraw the writ petition. The Court granted the petitioners the liberty to challenge the revised/modified demand notice dated November 10, 2020, which was issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike. The reasoning for this decision is based on the petitioners' expressed desire to pursue a revised demand notice, indicating a procedural step rather than a decision on the merits of the original demand. The operative direction was the dismissal of the writ petition as withdrawn with the granted liberty.
Facts
The petitioners, Smt. Lakshmi Jayaram, Sri L. Jayarama, and Sri G.A. Sanjay, represented by their GPA holder M/s Mohan Builders, filed a writ petition challenging a demand notice dated February 25, 2020, issued by the Joint Director, Building License Cell (North), Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP). The demand notice included amounts for scrutiny fee, license fee, ground rent and GST, and security deposit. The petitioners also challenged a demand for Construction Workers Welfare Cess. Subsequently, the petitioners filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the writ petition to challenge a revised demand notice dated November 10, 2020, issued by the BBMP.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to challenge a revised demand notice? The petitioners argued that they wished to withdraw the current writ petition to challenge a revised demand notice dated November 10, 2020, issued by the third respondent (BBMP). They sought permission to do so. The respondents did not record any specific arguments against the withdrawal, but the court's decision implies their acquiescence or the court's discretion to allow withdrawal. The core issue was whether the court should grant the petitioners' request for withdrawal and the associated liberty to pursue a revised demand.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION No.5219/2020 (LB - BMP)
BETWEEN
SMT. LAKSHMI JAYARAM AGED 45 YEARS, W/O L.JAYARAMA,
SRI L.JAYARAMA AGED 55 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI LAKSHMI NARAYANAPPA,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.108, 5TH MAIN ROAD, 1ST BLOCK, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU – 560 082. 3. SRI G.A. SANJAY AGED 44 YEARS, S/O G.M.ASWATHA REDDY, RESIDING AT NO.194, GUNJUR VILLAGE AND POST, VARTHUR HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU – 560 087. REPRESENTED BY THEIR GPA HOLDER M/S MOHAN BUILDERS, REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO.317, 6TH CROSS, OMBR LAYOUT,
2 BENGALURU – 560 043. REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER, SRI RAVULAPALLI MOHAN KUMAR. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI VIVEKANANDA T.P., ADVOCATE (VIDEO CONFERENCING))
AND
STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, 4TH FLOOR, VIKASA SOUDHA, DR,AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU – 560 001. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, VIAKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU – 01, REPRESENTED BY ITS
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.