M/S Vantage Advertising Private LTD vs. State Of Karnataka
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Vantage Advertising Private Ltd, filed a writ petition (W.P.No.15963/2023) challenging demand notices issued by the Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) for payment of Ground Rent, GST at 18%, and Advertisement Fee. The petitioner contends that their writ petition was wrongly tagged with a batch of other writ petitions concerning Ground Rent, leading to its disposal along with those matters. The petitioner argues that their case primarily pertains to advertisement tax, not solely Ground Rent, and the inclusion of 'Ground Rent' in the prayer led to the misclassification. The present proceeding is a Review Petition filed under Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC, seeking to review the High Court's previous judgment dated 05.06.2025 passed in W.P.No.15963/2023.
Held
The Court allowed the Review Petition. It accepted the submission of the learned counsel for the review petitioner that the writ petition (W.P.No.15963/2023) was wrongly tagged with a batch of writ petitions pertaining to Ground Rent. The Court acknowledged that the petitioner's writ petition was disposed of along with other connected matters in the case of M/S. SAPTAGIRI SHELTERS VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS. The Court found merit in the petitioner's contention that their writ petition, which included prayers for Ground Rent, GST at 18%, and Advertisement Fee, was primarily related to advertisement tax and was therefore wrongly associated with the Ground Rent batch. Consequently, the Court recalled its order dated 05th June, 2025, specifically concerning W.P.No.15963/2023, and restored the writ petition to its original file. The Court directed the office to list the writ petition before the appropriate Bench with the correct roster. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner (W.P.No.15963/2023) was erroneously clubbed with a batch of writ petitions concerning Ground Rent, thereby leading to an incorrect disposal? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argues that their writ petition was wrongly tagged with other matters dealing with Ground Rent. They assert that while Ground Rent was mentioned in the prayer, their primary grievance concerned advertisement tax. The presence of the term 'Ground Rent' in the prayer caused the misclassification. They rely on the content of their writ petition (Annexure-B) to demonstrate that it pertains to advertisement tax. Respondents' Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents in opposition to the review petition. The Court accepted the petitioner's submission without hearing counter-arguments from the respondents.
Sections Cited
Section 114, Order 47 Rule 1
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Learned Counsel for the review petitioner submits that the writ petition filed by the review petitioner in W.P.No.15963/2023(LB/BMP) was wrongly tagged with a batch of writ petitions, which were heard by this Court pertaining to Ground Rent and the writ petition has been disposed of along with the batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.230806/2022 (LB-BMP) and connected petitions in the case of M/S. SAPTAGIRI SHELTERS VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS.
Learned Counsel points out to Annexure-B which is a copy of the writ petition filed by the review petitioner, where the prayer in the writ petition is in respect of Demand Notices issued by the BBMP for payment of Ground Rent, GST at 18%, Advertisement Fee, etc. Learned Counsel submits that since the word ‘Ground Rent’ was found in the prayer, the writ petition was wrongly connected with the other petitions. The writ HC-KAR
CNR: KAHC010764712025 NC: 2026:KHC:54320 RP No. 523 of 2025
petition filed by the petitioner pertains to advertisement tax.
Accepting the submission made by the learned Counsel for review petitioner, the Review Petition is allowed, while recalling the order dated 05th June, 2025, insofar as W.P.No.15963/2023 is concerned, which was filed by the review petitioner herein. The writ petition is restored to its original file.
Office is directed to list the writ petition before the Bench having roster.
Pending Interlocutory Application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (R DEVDAS) JUDGE
DL CT:SM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30
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.