Dismissed

Sri Doddahobalaiah v. the Deputy Commissioner

Karnataka HC5 Jan 2022WP/2930/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging non-payment of compensation for acquired karab land. The court granted indulgence to petitioners to submit a representation with necessary material within four weeks for consideration by respondents.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit a representation with necessary material within four weeks for the Court to consider the claim for compensation.

Sri Doddahobalaiah Vs the Deputy Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.2930 OF 2016 (KLR-REG)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI. DODDAHOBALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O LATE KAVALAIAH, KEMPANADODDERI VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 103.

¶9

SRI. SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, S/O LATE KEMPAHOBALAIAH, KEMPANADODDERI VILLAGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 103.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. YATEESH KUMAR R., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, TUMKUR DISTIRCT, TUMKUR - 572 103.

¶14

THE TAHSILDAR, TUMKUR DISTIRCT, TUMKUR - 572 103.

¶15

THE CHAIRMAN, LAND GRANT COMMITTEE, KEMPANADODDERI VILALGE, KORA HOBLI, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 103.

¶16

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KIADB, MARUTHI TOWERS, 1ST FLOOR, NEXT TO SIT COLLEGE,

B.H. ROAD,

TUMKUR - 572 103.

THE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KIADB, MARUTHI TOWERS, 2ND FLOOR, NEXT TO SIT COLLEGE, B.H. ROAD, TUMKUR - 572 103.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP FOR R1 TO T3. SRI. SOMASHEKAR T., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.B. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT NOS.2 & 3 TO COMPLY WITH THE ORDER OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF TUMKUR IN CASE NO.R.A.1/1998-99 DATED 17.06.2004 VIDE ANN-B AND ETC.

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR FINAL DISPOSAL, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The short grievance of the petitioners is as to non-

¶27

payment of the compensation to the karab land that adjoined his land which was acquired by KIADB. After service of notice the respondents having entered appearance through their counsel have filed the Statement of Objection resisting the writ petition.

¶28

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶29

and having perused the petition papers, this Court is inclined to grant indulgence in the matter in the sense that petitioners

¶30

¶31

should make an appropriate representation to the respondents producing all the necessary material in support of their claim for the payment of compensation for the land in question and if such a representation is made within four weeks, the same shall be considered by the answering respondents within a period of three months and in accordance with law.

¶32

All contentions are kept open, costs having been made easy.

¶33

Sd/JUDGE

¶34

DS/JY

Sri Doddahobalaiah v. the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Doddahobalaiah v. the Deputy Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. M D Tilakavathy Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Anthony Raj a Vs Equitas Small Finance Bank

Sri M C Hombalaiah Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Yogesh v R Vs the Tribunal of Maintenance and

Sri Narasimhamurthy Vs the State of Karnataka

Manjunath S Vs the State of Karnataka