SC relief to Sadananda Gowda in land case

In what could be a major relief for the Central Government, the Supreme Court today set aside a 2012 judgment of the Karnataka High Court whereby it had set aside construction permits pertaining to a plot allotted to Union Law Minister Sadananda Gowda, and BJP leader DN Jeevaraj.

The apex court set aside the high court judgment quashing the orders sanctioning the building construction plans in favour of Gowda and BJP lawmaker D N Jeevaraj by the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) and had directed the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to take action against them for violating conditions in the lease-cum-sale agreement.

“The order passed by the High Court is not sustainable in law and the said order is hence set aside”.

The case has been suspended since 2 January 2013 after the apex court stayed the proceedings. The court added that it does not agree with the view adopted by the High Court that the amalgamation of the two plots is a breach or violation of the lease-cum-sale agreement. “The matter should rest at that”, it said.

“In our opinion, the high court was in error in coming to the conclusion that the buildings constructed on the two plots were not in accordance with the sanctioned plan”, Justice Lokur said.

“Merely because a building has some deviations from the sanctioned plan, either at the initial stage or later on in the construction, does not necessarily mean that the construction is per se illegal unless the deviations are irremediable, in which event an occupancy certificate or completion certificate will not be granted”, it said.

“The mere existence of some deviations in the buildings”, the court said.

“BDA is on record to specifically say that there is no violation of the lease-cum-sale agreement and the BBMP is on record to say that there is no violation of the sanctioned plan, except for some deviations”.

Citing another instance, the court said even when Gowda was Karnataka chief minister, BBMP carried out inspection of the construction at his plot and found some deviation from sanctioned building plan.

Nagalakshmi Bai had then petitioned the Karnataka High Court making these allegations.

“It would be a bit far-fetched to assume, in a case such as the present, that an incomplete structure that can be modified is per se contrary to the building bye-laws or the lease-cum-sale agreement especially when changes or modifications could be made therein”, the bench said.

On 19 October 2012, the high court also asked the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) to take action against them within three months for failing to comply with the conditions based on which the land was granted to them.