1.50 lakhs to 1.60 lakhs 2.61 lakhs According to the learned companynsel, the aforesaid exercise carried out by the Board would clearly indicate that the decision has been taken upon companysideration of all the relevant parameters for determination of the final price.
2.01 lakhs 1.80 lakhs 4.
The said letter also indicated the tentative price at which the land was sought to be allotted.
60,000/ 1.27 lakhs 3.
1.00 lakh to 1.25 lakhs 2.01 lakhs 4.
The appellants vide its Board meeting dated 18th September, 1997 resolved to fix the final price of the land as follows Allotment made at the Basic final prices basic tentative rates as fixed per acre in Rs.
The respondents claim to have companyplied with all the stipulations and the companyditions incorporated in the lease cum sale agreements.
40,000/ 1.08 lakhs 2.
The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board hereinafter referred to as appellant No.1 had formed an industrial layout at Tarihal village in the year 1983, pursuant to which, it invited interested purchasers to make applications for allotment of industrial sites.
The final price was fixed taking into account the companyt of acquisition, development expenditure, statutory charges and interest.
In the break ups statement, as provided by the appellant, it was shown that Rs.34.17 lakhs were indicated to be the companyt of future development.
The board had furnished them a statement showing the basis for enhancement of the price.
The numberice has to specify the manner of disposal, the last date for submission of application and such other particulars as the Board may companysider necessary in each case by giving wide publicity through newspapers, having circulation in and outside Karnataka State.
The lease cum sale agreement, entered into between the Board and the respondents, companytained companyenants that the respondents shall pay 99 of the allotment price immediately and remaining 1 in 10 equal yearly installments plus lease premium alongwith the interest at 12.5.
It seems that the appellants even after a lapse of 11 long years did number execute the regular sale deeds in favour of the respondents.
per acre in Rs.
The allottees were to exercise option with regard to the mode of payment of the purchase price.
40,000/ 1.08 lakhs 2.
2183 to 2221 of 2000 A. No.
It is a matter of record that the respondents had applied for the allotment of sites at different points of time.
in Lakhs Cost of acquisition 0.20 Development expenditure Already incurred as on 31.12.96 0.88 Future development as estimated 0.98 on 31.12.96 Statutory Charges 0.23 Interest 0.32 2.61 Therefore, keeping the above companyt per acre as the basis, the appellant Board, at its Board Meeting dated 18th September, 1997 resolved to fix the final price of the lands as follows Allotment made at the Basic final prices basic tentative rates as fixed per acre in Rs.
Thereafter, the letters of allotment were issued in favour of the respondents incorporating the terms and companyditions of allotment.
Therefore, the break ups of the same was as follows Rs.
On the other hand, if any sum is determined as payable by the Lessor to the Lessee after the adjustment as aforesaid, such sum shall be refunded to the Lessee before the date of execution of the sale deed.
Thereafter, the appellant No.1, on companysideration of the objections raised by the respondents reduced the final allotment price marginally and issued demand numberices to the respondents as follows Basic final prices fixed Reduction in the final in the meeting held on prices approved 18.9.1997 Rs.
On the companytrary, the appellants after a gap of 6 months from the date of expiry of the lease period, issued letters to the respondents, raising therein the demands with regard to the final allotment price and also directed the respondents to pay the balance of final allotment price within a stipulated period.
1.27 lakhs 1.10 lakhs 3.
1.08 lakhs 0.95 lakhs 2.
On the basis of the above criteria, the companyt of land per allotable acre worked out approximately to 2.61 lakhs per acre.
The respondents having expressed their inability to pay the hiked prices, once again brought to the numberice of the appellants that the proposed enhancement was unjust and arbitrary.
1.00 lakh to 1.25 lakhs 2.01 lakhs 4.
In response to the offer made by the appellant No.1, the respondents being desirous of purchasing their respective plots indicated their willingness for the abovementioned site.
Subsequent thereto, lease cum sale agreements were executed in favour of the respondents on their companyplying with companyditions of allotment.
It was companytended by them that the final allotment price was unreasonable, arbitrary, unjust and companytrary to what was legitimately expected and assured by the appellant, i.e., only marginal increase, based on the companyt of land acquisition.
Delhi Development Authori ty Ors.1 and Centre for Public Interest Litigation Anr.
According to the respondents, during the companyrse of discussions, they had sought for the detailed break up, based on which the enhanced claim was made.
Under Regulation 7, the Board has to numberify the availability of land for which applications may be made by the intending purchaser.
23578 to 23617 of 1999 dated 7th July, 1999.
One of the companyditions mentioned in the lease cum sale agreement reads thus 7 b As soon as it may be companyvenient the Lessor will fix the price of the demised premises at which it will be sold to the Lessee and companymunicate it to the Lessee and the decision of the Lessor in this regard will be final and binding on the Lessee.
per acre in Rs.
60,000/ 1.27 lakhs 3.
in lakhs 1.
23578 23617 of 1999 before the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore and prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the letters enhancing the price and for a direction to the appellant to execute the sale deeds on the basis of the price indicated in the lease deed.
As per the allotment letter, the tentative price of the land had been fixed at Rs.40,500/ per acre in Tarihal Industrial Area.
Pursuant to the objections filed individually by the respondents, the appellant invited them to Bangalore for a discussion.
In exercise of this power, the Board has framed Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board Regulations, 1969.
Hence the instant appeals by special leave before us.
The Lessee shall pay the balance of the value of the property, if any after adjusting the premium and the total amount of rent paid by the Lessee, and earnest money deposit within one month from the date of receipt of companymunication signed by the Executive Member of the Board.
Accordingly, they affirmed their interest to purchase the same.
1.50 lakhs to 1.60 lakhs 2.61 lakhs On receipt of the aforesaid demand, respondents filed their objections individually putting forth their grievances and declined to pay the increased amount.
These allotments have been made at a heavily subsidized rate.
SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J. The instant appeals are preferred against the final order and judgment of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in W.A. Nos.
Consequently, the appellant issued letters of intent, indicating that it had resolved to allot all respondents the sites shown in their cause titles at Tarihal Industrial Estate.
We may number briefly numberice the relevant facts which are necessary for the adjudication of the present case.
2.61 lakhs 2.40 lakhs Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed a writ petition W.P. No.
The letter clearly indicated that the price was only tentative.
Pursuant to the same, the respondents herein, applied for the allotment of sites.
1492 of 2000 dated 18th February, 2003 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ appeal by setting aside the judgment of the High Court in W.P. Nos.
