Landowners sought quashing of the General Award passed for their acquired land and consideration under Section 29(2) KIAD Act. The court allowed the petition on terms consistent with its earlier similar decisions, quashing the award with a revival condition for adverse claims.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC:52610 WP NO.34668 OF 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.34668 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by SHARMA ANAND CHAYA Location: High Court of
Karnataka
PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO.7032, SOBHA RUBY, 3RD FLOOR, SOBHA APARTMENTS, 7TH BLOCK, NAGASANDRA, BENGALURU - 560 073.
…PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. SHARAN N. MAJAGE.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:52610 WP NO.34668 OF 2024
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVINDRANATH B., AGA;
SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL AWARD PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.3 DATED 30TH AUGUST, 2021 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SURVEY NO.3/1 MEASURING 191 /2 GUNTAS SITUATE AT BARGENAHALLI VILLAGE, SOMPURA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT BELONGING TO PETITIONERS VIDE ANNXURE-F; DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE PETITIONERS AS PER SECTION 29(2) OF THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT ACT; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH
ORAL ORDER
Sri. Ravindranath B., learned Additional Government
Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1; and Sri. H.L.
NC: 2024:KHC:52610 WP NO.34668 OF 2024
Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents 2 and 3.
NC: 2024:KHC:52610 WP NO.34668 OF 2024
and direction was issued to the respondent-Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board to consider the case of the petitioners therein under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, I am of
the view that, the present petition deserves to be allowed on the same terms. Accordingly, I pass the following:
O R D E R
NC: 2024:KHC:52610 WP NO.34668 OF 2024
deposit before the competent Court, if any, and disburse to the petitioners in terms of the observation made above in accordance with law.
SD/(E.S. INDIRESH) JUDGE
ARK
1 issue framed by the court
Should the General Award dated 30 August 2021 for the petitioners' land be quashed so compensation can be considered under Section 29(2) KIAD Act?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
B.H. Honnappa
G. Honnamma
Indira Jyothi B.M.
Padmarjuna B.M.
The State of Karnataka by its Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industries
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board
E.S. Indiresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
