V. Raja Gopal v. Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1474 of 2016 Date:20.01.2016 Between:

V.Raja Gopal, S/o Sundararamayya ..... Petitioner And:

Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, Hyderabad, reptd by its Commissioner and another.

.....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Y.Shashidhar Reddy Counsel for the respondents: None appeared The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The petitioner, who is a tenant of respondent No.1 in respect of Shop No.63 situated at District Commercial Complex, Tarnaka, Hyderabad, filed this Writ Petition feeling aggrieved by the action of the respondents in proceeding to evict him from the said shop highhandedly without considering his representation, dated 04.12.2015. The averments contained in the affidavit, filed in support of this Writ Petition, reveal that the dispute has narrowed down to the actual quantum of arrears of rents payable by the petitioner. While it is the case of the respondents that the petitioner is liable to pay a sum of

Rs.5,20,501/-, in his reply, dated 27.7.2015, to the notice, dated 17.7.2015, the petitioner has disputed the quantum of enhancement at which the arrears were calculated by the respondents. The petitioner pleaded that after filing his reply, he has paid a sum of Rs.2,68,765/-. Mr.Y.Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, representing the respondents, has admitted the above plea of the petitioner.

Thus, the parties are left with the dispute over the balance sum of Rs.2,51,763/-. As this Court feels that this dispute can be resolved through proper reconciliation of the accounts, respondent No.2 is directed to issue a notice to the petitioner for reconciliation of the accounts by fixing a specific date. The petitioner shall attend the meeting on the date so fixed and after such reconciliation, respondent No.2 shall take a decision and communicate the same to the petitioner in writing. If the petitioner feels aggrieved by such decision, he shall be free to avail the remedy of a civil suit.

Till a decision is taken and communicated to the petitioner, the respondents shall not take coercive steps against the petitioner for recovery of the balance amount.

Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.1859 of 2016 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY 20th January, 2016 DR