Disposed

Smt. Hanumakka v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC18 Jun 2024WP/6912/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land acquired by KIADB was claimed by rival parties in a pending civil suit. The petitioner sought a direction that compensation not be paid to the contesting respondents but be deposited before a competent court. Holding KIADB cannot decide title, the High Court disposed of the petition directing deposit of the award amount with the Reference Court.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Hanumakka Vs the State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:21554 WP No. 6912 of 2023

¶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. 6912 OF 2023 (LA-KIADB)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. HANUMAKKA W/O.LATE NARASIMHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KODIGEHALLI VILLAGE, THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562123.

¶8

…PETITIONER

¶9

(BY SRI. SRINIVASA T., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER.2 [SLO.2],

¶14

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB), (BMICP) AND BENGALURU RURAL, NO.14/3, MAHARSHI ARVINDA BHAVANA, 1^ST FLOOR, NRUPATHUNAGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.

¶15

SRI. B.T. HANUMANTHARAJU VENKATESHWARA LAND DEVELOPERS, NO.185, 1^ST STAGE, 3^RD CROSS, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 1^ST MAIN ROAD,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:21554 WP No. 6912 of 2023

¶18

KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR, T.DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU 560 057.

¶19

DR. KRISHNAMURTHY S/O.SRI MAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, NO.E-204, MANTRI TERRACE, BELEKALE, BANNERUGHATTA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 076.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

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

¶22

SRI D. BOREGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2; SRI. R. BHADRINATH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4;

¶23

VIDE ORDER DATED 18.06.2024, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.3 IS DISPENSED WITH]

¶24

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO AWARD COMPENSATION AMOUNT IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 BEARING SY.NO.201/1, MEASURING TO AN EXTENT OF 1 ACRE OF LAND, SITUATED AT OBALAURA VILLAGE, THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT AND ETC.

¶25

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

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Certain lands in Sy. No.201/1 situated at Obalapura village, Thyamagondlu hobli, Nelamangala Taluk,

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:21554 WP No. 6912 of 2023

¶29

Bengaluru Rural District, have been acquired for the purpose of respondent No.2 - Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board ('KIADB' for short). On the ground that there is a dispute as to ownership of the land concerned, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with the following prayers:

¶30

"WHEREFORE, Petitioner is most respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to:

¶31

(a) Issue Writ of Mandamus to the 2^nd respondent authority not disburse or not to release the award compensation amount in favour of respondent No.3 and 4, bearing Sy.No.201/1, measuring to an extent of 1 acre of land, situated at Obalaura village, Thyamagondlu Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District.

¶32

(b) To direct the 2^nd respondent authority to deposit the award compensation amount in respect of land bearing Sy.No.201/1, measuring to an extent of 1 acre of land, situated at Obalaura Village, Thyamagondlu Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District, before the Competent Civil Court, because the Civil Suit is pending for

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:21554 WP No. 6912 of 2023

¶34

consideration, between the petitioner and respondent No.3 and 4 herein.

¶35

(c) Grant such other and future reliefs that this Hon'ble Court feels deem fit under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."

¶36

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that there is a dispute as to the ownership of the land concerned and for that reason, the respondent No.2 intends to deposit the award amount before the Reference Court.

¶37

It is a settled proposition of law that respondent No.2 - KIADB cannot decide title in respect of the property concerned. When there is no dispute as to the ownership, it will pay the compensation to the undisputed owner. When there is a dispute as to the ownership of the property acquired, the award amount shall be deposited before the Reference Court and it is for the rival parties claiming ownership of the property acquired, to prove their title to the property before the Reference Court and claim

¶38

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:21554 WP No. 6912 of 2023

¶39

the compensation or seek enhancement of the award amount.

¶40

For the aforementioned reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to deposit the award amount in respect of the land which is the subject matter of the writ petition before the Reference Court in accordance with law and liberty is given to the contesting parties to work out their remedy before the Reference Court.

¶41

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

SMA

¶44

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3

Smt. Hanumakka v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Hanumakka v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

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

Sri. Dundegowda Vs the State of Karnataka