Allowed

Sri. Dundegowda v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2024WP/12734/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land acquired by KIADB was compensated via a general award. The petitioner sought a consent award instead. The respondents raised no objection if ownership documents were produced. The court set aside the general award as to his land and directed reconsideration under Section 29(2).

What did the court decide?

General award set aside for petitioner's land; SLAO directed to pass consent/Section 29(2)(agreement) award within three months; deposit withdrawable; restored if ownership unproven.

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

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:21551 WP No. 12734 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 12734 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. DUNDEGOWDA S/O LATE CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT NO.5, 1^ST CROSS SBM COLONY, CHUNCHAGHATTA MAIN ROAD, KONANAKUNTE POST, BENGALURU - 560 062 (BY SRI. SRIHARI A.V., ADVOCATE)

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

AND:

¶10

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

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560001 BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN BANGALORE - 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER

¶13

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.14/1, ARAVINDA BHAVAN

¶14

¶15

NC: 2024:KHC:21551 WP No. 12734 of 2024

¶16

1^ST FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. YOGESH D. NAIK, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1;

¶19

SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3)

¶20

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD BEARING NO.KIADB/L.A.Q./ /2019-20, DATED 11.10.2019 PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ETC.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The case of the petitioner is that his land in Survey No.15/1 of Jakkasandra village, Maralawadi Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District, was acquired by the respondent No.2 - Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board ('KIADB' for short) for purposes of formation of an industrial area. However, respondent No.2 has passed a general award and deposited the

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:21551 WP No. 12734 of 2024

¶25

compensation in the Reference Court. He prays that consent award be passed in respect of the said land.

¶26

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 said land.

¶27

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

¶28

Hence, the following:

¶29

ORDER

¶30

(i) The writ petition is allowed;

¶31

(ii) The impugned general award dated 11.10.2019 at Annexure-A to the writ petition insofar as the

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:21551 WP No. 12734 of 2024

¶33

land of the petitioner, which is the subject matter of the instant writ petition, is set aside;

¶34

(iii) The respondent No.3 / 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;

¶35

(iv) The respondent No.3 / Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, is at liberty to withdraw the amount that has been deposited by it pursuant to the general award before the jurisdictional Court;

¶36

(v) It is needless to state that, in the event the petitioner failing to provide necessary documents to establish his ownership over the

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:21551 WP No. 12734 of 2024

¶39

land concerned, the general award would stand

¶40

restored.

¶41

Sd/JUDGE

¶42

SMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16

Sri. Dundegowda v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Dundegowda 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 Omprakash Pancharya Vs Sri N Prem Kumar

Sri. Ramaiah Reddy Vs Smt. Nagamma

Sri. Manjunath H Vs M/S Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.

Smt Venkatamma Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Nagamma Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Hanumakka Vs the State of Karnataka