Partly allowed

Sri. Krishnappa, v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC4 Jun 2024WP/10865/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the general award regarding the petitioner's acquired land and directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer to reconsider the request for an agreement award under Section 29(2) of the KIADB Act, subject to the petitioner establishing ownership. The petition was disposed of with these directions.

What did the court decide?

General award set aside; respondent directed to reconsider claim for agreement award within three months upon proof of ownership.

Sri. Krishnappa, Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:19023 WP No. 10865 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.10865 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI KRISHNAPPA

¶8

S/O MUNISHAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS R/AT BYRADENAHALLI

¶9

KUNDANA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 110.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI SHARAN N. MAJAGE, ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by V MANJUSHA BAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560 001.

¶15

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER KHANIJA BHAVANA RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:19023 WP No. 10865 of 2024

¶18

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2 KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.14/3, 1ST FLOOR, CFC BUILDING MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVANA NRUPATUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI YOGESH D. NAIK, AGA., FOR R.1; SRI H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R.2 & R.3-KIADB)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI QUASHING THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB/LAQ/ /2023-24 DATED 08.02.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY.NO.45/1 MEASURING 1 ACRE 33 GUNTAS OF LAND SITUATED AT BYRADENAHALLI VILLAGE, KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-F, ETC.

¶22

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

¶24

NC: 2024:KHC:19023 WP No. 10865 of 2024

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The case of the petitioner is that his land in Survey No.45/1 measuring 1 acre 33 guntas of Byradenahalli Village, Kundana Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, was acquired for the purpose of respondent no.2/Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board. Further, respondent no.3 has passed a general award and deposited the compensation in the Reference Court. He prays that consent award be passed in respect of the said land.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that they have no objection to pass a consent award provided the petitioner produces all the relevant documents to show that he is the owner of the property.

¶28

Under similar circumstances, this Court in umpteen number of cases has permitted the land losers to claim compensation as per the consent award upon establishing the fact that they are the owners of the property. There is

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC:19023 WP No. 10865 of 2024

¶31

no reason why a similar order should not be passed in the instant case also.

¶32

4. Hence, the following:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

(i) The impugned general award dated 08.02.2024

¶35

at Annexure-F to the writ petition insofar as the land of the petitioner, which is the subject matter of the instant writ petition, is set aside;

¶36

(ii) The respondent/Special Land Acquisition Officer of the KIADB is directed to reconsider the request of the petitioner for award of compensation by way of an agreement under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 and pass necessary orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order;

¶37

(iii) The respondent/Special Land Acquisition Officer,

¶38

KIADB, is at liberty to withdraw the amount that

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:19023 WP No. 10865 of 2024

¶40

has been deposited by it pursuant to the general award before the jurisdictional Court;

¶41

(iv) It is needless to state that, in the event the petitioner failing to provide necessary documents to establish his ownership over the land concerned or if there is a dispute as to ownership, the general award would stand restored;

¶42

(v) The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶43

SD/JUDGE

¶44

VMB

¶45

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

Sri. Krishnappa, v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Krishnappa, v. the State of Karnataka

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

Sri Gangahanumaiah M Vs Sri D Shankarappa

Sri Sanjeev Kumar Goyal Vs Smt Kalpana Palegar

Smt. Rukmini Bai, Vs Sri Bhagavathi Devaru

M. Sathyanarayana Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Sri. Gangarangegowda Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Ramanjinappa Vs the State of Karnataka