Muniyamma Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

Muniyamma Vs State of Karnataka — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the General Award dated 30.12.2013 (Annexure-A) insofar as the petitioner's property is concerned; direction to respondent No.2-KIADB to consider the petitioner's case under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 upon her satisfying the requirements thereof (general award to stand restored in the event of any dispute), and to withdraw any amount in deposit before the Competent Court and disburse it to the petitioner in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the General Award dated 30.12.2013 (Annexure-A, bearing No. KIADB.L.A.Q. 2013-14) passed under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act 1984 in respect of the petitioner's land should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The impugned General Award dated 30.12.2013 produced at Annexure-A, described as passed by respondent No.2-KIADB, is quashed insofar as the property of the petitioner is concerned.

Ratio / Principle

Writ petition is allowed in part.

Key takeaways

Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 upon the petitioner satisfying all the requirements thereof; needless to state that in the event of any dispute, the general award would stand restored.ratio¶39
Respondent No.2 is directed to withdraw the amount in deposit before the Competent Court, if any, and disburse the same to the petitioner in accordance with law.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Land acquisition - KIADB - General award dated 30.12.2013 (Annexure-A, No. KIADB.L.A.Q. 2013-14) under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act 1984 passed on account of a private title dispute over the acquired land (Sy.No.60/5, 19 guntas, Kurgal Village, Vemgal Hobli, Kolar Taluk, acquired vide notifications dated 06.07.2010 and 09.09.2011) - Title dispute resolved by dismissal of O.S.No.550/2013 by judgment and decree dated 11.08.2023 (Annexure-B) - Landowner sought quash of the general award and grant of compensation under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 - Held: writ petition allowed in part; general award quashed insofar as the petitioner's property is concerned; respondent No.2-KIADB directed to consider her case under Section 29(2) of the KIADB Act, 1966 upon satisfaction of requirements, failing which (in the event of any dispute) the general award would stand restored; amount in deposit before the Competent Court, if any, to be withdrawn and disbursed to the petitioner.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:118 WP No. 19843 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 19843 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

MUNIYAMMA W/O LATE D. SONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS R/O KURUGAL VILLAGE VEMGAL HOBLI, KOLAR TALUK KOLAR - 563 102.

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI. B MANJUNATH., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA

REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVT., DEPARTMENT O INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

BANGALORE - 560 001.

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER NO.39, SHANTHI GRUHA, 4^TH FLOOR BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.39, SHANTHI GRUHA, 4^TH FLOOR BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING PALACE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:118 WP No. 19843 of 2024

(BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA AGA FOR R1; SRI. GOPAL V. BILALMANE.,ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE GENERAL AWARD DATED 30.12.2013 AT ANNEXURE-A BEARING NO.KIADB.L.A.Q. 2013-14 PASSED BY THE R3 UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1984 AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

ORAL ORDER

Sri. Gopal V. Bilalmane, learned counsel undertakes to appear for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

Petitioner claiming to be the owner of land in Sy.No.60/5 measuring 19 guntas situated at Kurgal Village, Vemgal Hobli, Kolar Taluk which has been acquired by respondent No.2 in terms of notification dated 06.07.2010 and 09.09.2011 is before this Court in this petition seeking quash of award dated 30.12.2013 and for direction to the respondents to pass the award under the provisions of Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966.

Sri. Gopal V. Bilalmane, learned counsel for the respondents-KIADB submits that since there was a private

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:118 WP No. 19843 of 2024

dispute with regard to the property subject matter of the petition, general award as per Annexure-A has been passed and now that since the dispute has been resolved by dismissal of suit in O.S.No.550/2013, in terms of the judgment and decree dated 11.08.2023 as per Annexure-B and that since the petitioner is ready and willing to accept the compensation in terms of the Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, her representation in this regard will be considered in accordance with law.

Submission is taken on record.

Accordingly, following:

ORDER

(i). Writ petition is allowed in part.

(ii). Impugned General Award dated 30.12.2013 produced at Annexure-A passed by the respondent No.2-KIADB insofar as the property of the petitioner herein is concerned, is hereby quashed.

4 -

NC: 2025:KHC:118 WP No. 19843 of 2024

(iii). Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner herein in terms of the Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, upon the petitioner satisfying all the requirement thereof. Needless to state that in the event of any dispute, the general award would stand restored.

(iv). Respondent No.2 is directed to withdraw the amount in deposit before the Competent Court, if any, and disburse to the petitioner herein, in terms of the observation made above, in accordance with law.

Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28