BENGALURU: The high court ordered the govt to refund with interest the initial deposit of Rs 76 lakh to a Bengalurean who had paid the sum after successfully bidding for three pieces of recovered land in Bengaluru South taluk in a public auction but was not given possession of the same.
The govt was also ordered to pay him interest at 10% on the rest of the auction price of Rs 3.1 crore he had deposited with the court and Rs 1 lakh as cost.
“Money belonging to a citizen is his property. If that is retained by the state entities falling under Article 12, that amounts to temporary acquisition of property for which a compensation has to be paid going by Article 300A jurisprudence as developed by the SC,” a division bench of Justices Krishna S Dixit and Ramachandra D Huddar said.
Ramiah Reddy, a resident of Marathahalli, participated in a public auction and successfully bid for purchasing three pieces of lands in Kengeri, Bengaluru South taluk and paid on May 28, 2005 Rs 76 lakh, 25% of the total bid amount of nearly Rs 3.1 crore.
The land had been purchased by the owner though his income was more than Rs 2 lakh in violation of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act-1961. The owner moved the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal, and ultimately on June 11, 2013, the tribunal quashed the govt order forfeiting the lands.
Reddy sought for alternative land. But on Jan 1, 2016, the govt issued an endorsement, saying that he would be refunded Rs 78 lakh without any interest, thereby rejecting his request for alternative land. He then approached HC and on Feb 17, 2016, a single bench directed the govt to give Reddy his due. The court noted that the govt’s stand that no alternative land can be given or no interest on initial deposit can be paid cannot be accepted. The govt appealed against this order.
Lands hastily auctioned
The division bench partly allowed the appeal by observing that the single bench could not have granted relief in the absence of right to allotment of alternative land. However, the bench noted the bidder has to be compensated for the amounts he had deposited, saying that lands were hastily auctioned though the landowner had challenged the forfeiture. “The limited liability on account of demonstrable culpability of the appellants entitles the respondent–petitioner to an equitable relief. Denying the same would shake the conscience of the court. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes had said: Constitutions are intended to preserve practical and substantial rights, not to maintain theories,” the bench added.
The govt is now required to pay 10% interest from May 28, 2005 on Rs 76 lakh initial deposit and during the pendency of the appeal, the auction purchaser had deposited nearly Rs 2.3 crore with the court registry. The govt has been directed to pay 10% interest on this from Nov 25, 2019 till June 10, 2024.
If these directions are not complied with in six weeks, an additional interest at the rate of 4% on what is prescribed has to be given and it can be recovered from the erring officials. The registry has been asked to release Rs 2.3 crore to Reddy.
