Remanded

Shri Abhishek Gowda B M v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC28 Oct 2024WP/23797/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227, the High Court of Karnataka set aside an order resuming 4 acres of land. The court remanded the matter for fresh consideration to allow the petitioner to establish the validity of the original 1963 grant.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 19.11.2015 was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration with the petitioner given a date to appear and submit documents.

Shri Abhishek Gowda B M Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:43345 WP No. 23797 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 23797 OF 2024 (KLR-RES)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SHRI. ABHISHEK GOWDA B.M., S/O B.R.MUNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT BANDIKODIGEHALLI, JALAHOBLI, BENGALURU - 562 149.

¶7

…PETITIONER

¶8

(BY SRI. JAYAKUMAR S.PATIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SRIHARI A.V., ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

Digitally signed by CHAITHANYA K Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶11

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶12

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU DISTRICT, BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶13

THE TAHSILDAR, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU - 560 009.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SMT. B.P.RADHA, AGA)

¶16

THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 19.11.2015 BEARING NO.RRT(2)N(A)CR

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:43345 WP No. 23797 of 2024

¶18

587/2008-09 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.2 VIDE ANNEXUREN AND ETC.

¶19

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THROUGH PHYSICAL HEARING/VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶21

ORAL ORDER

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that 4 acres of land in Sy.No.40/P16 of Bandikodigehalli Village, Jala Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, Bangalore was granted to one N.Govindarajulu in the year 1963 and after the alienation of the land in favour of third parties by the said grantee, petitioner has become the present owner of the property. In the course of arguments, it is also submitted that the land is now acquired for the purposes of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board. When this is the situation, respondent No.2 has initiated proceedings under Section 136(3) of Karnataka Land Revenue Act, 1964 and without notice to the petitioner has passed the impugned order and by holding that there is no property granted and has resumed the land to the Government.

¶23

¶24

NC: 2024:KHC:43345 WP No. 23797 of 2024

¶25

Per contra, learned AGA upon instructions submits

¶26

that notice was indeed issued in the name of mother of the petitioner and as she failed to appear, impugned order has been passed. She further justifies the impugned order and prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶27

The petitioner in turn submits that the mother of the petitioner was sick and unwell in the year 2015 when the impugned order came to be passed and he is not aware about issuance of notice and that grant was made way back in the year 1963 and there is an inordinate delay in initiating proceedings against the said grant and RTCs and the revenue entries support the grant made in favour of original grantee and if petitioner is given an opportunity he would establish that it was a valid grant and entries in the revenue records were properly made and grandfather of the petitioner had purchased the property from the original grantee and the petitioner has presently become the owner of the property.

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:43345 WP No. 23797 of 2024

¶29

Perusal of the records indicates that the petitioner

¶30

has not participated in the proceedings. Given the fact that the grant alleged to have been made in the year 1963, this Court is of the opinion that under the given peculiar facts and circumstances of the case interest of justice would be met if an opportunity is given to the petitioner to produce all the relevant documents before Deputy Commissioner to establish the grant keeping all the contentions open. Hence, the following:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

i) The impugned order dated 19.11.2015 bearing No.RRT/2/N(A)CR/587/08-09 passed by respondent No.2 vide Annexure-N to the writ petition is hereby set aside;

¶33

ii) The matter is remanded back to respondent No.2 for fresh consideration and the petitioner shall appear before respondent No.2 on 26.11.2024 at 3.00 p.m. without further notice;

¶34

¶35

NC: 2024:KHC:43345 WP No. 23797 of 2024

¶36

iii) Respondent No.2, after hearing the petitioner

¶37

and such other interested persons, shall pass

¶38

appropriate orders in accordance with law as

¶39

expeditiously as possible;

¶40

iv) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of .

¶41

SD/(M.I.ARUN) JUDGE

¶42

PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

Shri Abhishek Gowda B M v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Abhishek Gowda B M 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

Sirtaj Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Venkatamma Vs Devanahalli Tahsildar

Smt M Shakuntala T Alva Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. G v Narayanaswamy Vs the Assistant Commissioner

Smt. Pyrejan Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Premamma Vs State of Karnataka