M/S.Bogineni Hospitality India Private Limited Vs Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

M/S.Bogineni Hospitality India Private Limited Vs Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief on the merits; appeal dismissed with clarifications that KIADB is bound by its recorded statement (the appellant's application for fresh allotment of the subject plot to be considered in accordance with prevailing norms, and the plot not to be allotted to any other person until a decision is taken on the application), and that any adverse decision by KIADB would not entitle the appellant to revive the appeal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 02.05.2025 of the learned Single Judge rejecting W.P.No.19153/2024 (GM-KIADB) - which had upheld KIADB's cancellation of the allotment of Plot No.61-P - should be set aside and the writ petition allowed. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the statement made by the learned Advocate General on behalf of KIADB, the present appeal is dismissed.

Ratio / Principle

Application I.A.No.1/2025 is allowed and the delay of 118 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

Key takeaways

KIADB shall be bound by the statement made on its behalf and as recorded in the judgment; it is clarified that any adverse decision made by KIADB would not entitle the appellant to revive the present appeal.ratio¶44
All pending applications in the matter stand disposed of.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Karnataka HC (DB, per Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru; bench incl. K.S. Hemalekha), WA No. 1681 of 2025 (GM-KIADB), 30.06.2026 - filed under S. 4 Karnataka High Court Act against the Single Judge's order dated 02.05.2025 rejecting W.P.No.19153/2024 (GM-KIADB), which had upheld KIADB's intimation dated 15.06.2024 cancelling the appellant's allotment of Plot No.61-P (one acre, Hitech, Defence and Aerospace Park (IT sector), Bengaluru Urban District) for failure to pay `1,46,69,932/- towards balance tentative cost of land, interest and slum improvement cess. Delay of 118 days in filing the appeal condoned (I.A.No.1/2025). On the Advocate General's statement on instructions that the plot had not been allotted to any other party, that the appellant's application for fresh allotment would be considered per prevailing norms (at current value if eligible), and that the plot would be withheld from others until a decision, the appeal was dismissed; KIADB declared bound by the recorded statement, with clarification that an adverse KIADB decision would not entitle revival of the appeal; pending applications (incl. I.A.No.3/2025 seeking consideration of `1.08 crores deposited) disposed of.

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:32417-DB WA No. 1681 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1681 OF 2025 (GM-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

M/S.BOGINENI HOSPITALITY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND DIRECTOR

SMT. BOGINENI BHAGYALAKSHMI HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT BOGINENI BLOCK, 87/2A AND 87/3, SEEGEHALLI SH-35 WHITEFIELD -KI AIRPORT ROAD BENGALURU - 560 067

…APPELLANT

Digitally signed by K P SWETHA Location: High Court of Karnataka

(BY SRI K N PHANINDRA, SENIOR ADVOCATE, FOR SRI VIKRAM SIMHA.,ADVOCATE) AND:

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER NO. 49, 4^TH AND 5^TH FLOOR EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAVAN RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI K SHASHI KIRAN SHETTY. ADVOCATE GENERAL/SENIOR ADVOCATE

FOR SRI ASHOK NARAYAN NAYAK, ADVOCATE)

2 -

NC: 2026:KHC:32417-DB WA No. 1681 of 2025

HC-KAR

THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 02/05/2025 PASSED BY THIS LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.19153/2024 AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application, I.A.No.1/2025, the same is allowed and the delay of 118 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

The appellant has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 02.05.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.19153/2024 (GM-KIADB), whereby the said petition was rejected.

The appellant had filed the said petition impugning an intimation dated 15.06.2024 issued by the respondent-Karnataka

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:32417-DB WA No. 1681 of 2025

HC-KAR

Industrial Areas Development Board [ KIADB ] informing the appellant that the allotment of the subject plot (Plot No.61-P of Hitech, Defence and Aerospace Park (IT sector), Bengaluru Urban District, measuring one acre) has been cancelled.

The subject plot was allotted to the appellant by virtue of the allotment letter dated 25.06.2014. The intimation dated 15.06.2024 indicates that the same was cancelled as the appellant had failed to pay an amount of `1,46,69,932/- towards balance tentative cost of land, interest and slum improvement cess.

The learned Single Judge found that the cancellation was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable, and it was a result of repeated default on the part of the appellant.

The appellant has filed an application, I.A.No.3/2025, accompanied by an affidavit, inter alia , stating that the appellant has made an application for the fresh allotment of the subject plot. The appellant further states that the amount of `1.08 crores deposited with the respondent, be considered towards the said application.

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:32417-DB WA No. 1681 of 2025

HC-KAR

Mr. K. Shashi Kiran Shetty, the learned Advocate General submits on instructions that since the subject plot has not been allotted to any other party, the appellant’s application for allotment afresh would be considered in accordance with the prevailing norms. He submits that if the appellant is found eligible and satisfies the norms, the plot may be allotted to him at the current value. In the meanwhile, till a decision is taken on the appellant's application, the subject plot in question would not be allotted to any other person.

Mr. K.N. Phanindra, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the present appeal may be disposed of in view of the aforesaid statement.

We note that the application (I.A.No.3/2025) purports to be in furtherance of the present appeal. Notwithstanding the same, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant states that the present appeal may be disposed of in view of the learned Advocate General's statement.

In view of the above, the present appeal is dismissed. However, we clarify that the KIADB shall be bound by the

5 -

NC: 2026:KHC:32417-DB WA No. 1681 of 2025

HC-KAR

statement made on its behalf and as recorded above. We also clarify that any adverse decision made by KIADB would not entitle the appellant to revive the present appeal.

The pending applications stand disposed of.

Sd/(VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/(K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9