Disposed

Sri.B. Manjunatha v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC13 Jun 2024WP/4116/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition seeking direction to KIADB to disburse land compensation. The Court held that upon a dispute over ownership, the acquiring authority need not disburse compensation but deposit it before the Reference Court. The petition was disposed off.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; Writ Petition disposed off with direction to deposit compensation before the Reference Court.

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

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:21133 WP No. 4116 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO. 4116 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI.B. MANJUNATHA S/O LATE BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶8

SRI. B. NAGARAJA S/O LATE BALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,

¶9

BOTH THE PETITOINERS ARE

¶10

R/A HARALURU VILLAGE, CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL 562 110

¶11

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

¶12

(BY SRI. VARUN R R., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY

¶16

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, DODDABALLAPURA SUB DIVISION, DODDABALLAPURA,

¶17

¶18

NC: 2024:KHC:21133 WP No. 4116 of 2024

¶19

BENGALURU RURAL - 561 203

¶20

THE TAHSILDAR DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL - 562 110

¶21

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN, 1^ST FLOOR, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER.

¶22

THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, MAHARSHI ARAVIND BHAVAN, 1^ST FLOOR, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2 (B.M.I.C.P AND BENGALURU RURAL)

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. YOGESH D NAIK, AGA FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. H.L. PRADEEP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5)

¶25

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE R5 HEREIN TO DISBURSE THE COMPENSATION IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS HEREIN TOWARDS AGRICULTURAL LANDS BEARING SY. NO. 37 OF HARALURU VILLAGE, CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT MEASURING TO A TOTAL EXTENT OF 6 ACRES

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:21133 WP No. 4116 of 2024

¶27

BY CONSIDERING THE CLAIM APPLICATION DATED 25/10/2023 AS PER ANNEXURE-A.

¶28

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

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The case of the petitioners is that they are the owners of 6 Acres of land in Survey No.37 of Haraluru Village, Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District and the same has been acquired by the State for the purposes of respondent No.4-KIADB.

¶31

It is submitted that the compensation has not been disbursed in favour of the petitioners and hence, the writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

¶32

"Wherefore, the Petitioners above name prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant the following reliefs;

¶33

a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.5 herein to disburse the compensation in favour of the petitioners herein towards Agricultural lands bearing

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:21133 WP No. 4116 of 2024

¶35

Sy.No.37 of Haraluru Village Village, Channarayapatna Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District measuring to a total extent of 6 Acres by considering the Claim Application dated 25.10.2023 as per "Annexure-A' ; and

¶36

b. Issue such other order or direction, this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstance of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶37

Learned counsel appearing for the KIADB submits

¶38

that there is a dispute with regard to who is the owner of the land and hence, a decision has been taken to deposit the compensation before the Reference Court and the same will be deposited before the Reference Court if it has not already been done.

¶39

When there is a dispute as to the title, the acquiring authority is obliged to deposit the compensation before the Reference Court. Under the circumstances, no fault can be found in the actions of the respondent-KIADB. The petitioners are always at liberty to approach the Reference Court in the manner known to law and seek disbursement

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:21133 WP No. 4116 of 2024

¶42

or enhancement of the compensation amount so

¶43

deposited.

¶44

The Writ Petition is hereby disposed off , subject to the aforementioned observations.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

CH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53 SNN

Sri.B. Manjunatha v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.B. Manjunatha 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

Smt Chennamma Vs Smt R Jessimani

Sri. N. B. Shantha Murthy Vs Smt. Rudramma

Sri. Sathish Kini Ullal Vs U Sudhakar Kini

Smt Y S Swapna Vs the State of Karnataka

Ahle Sunnath Jamiathul Muslimeen Jamia Masjid Vs the Karnataka State Board of Auqaf

Sri. Krishnappa Vs the State of Karnataka