Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Smt Muniyamma Vs State of Karnataka — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

Home
Karnataka HC
2026
Smt Muniyamma Vs State of KarnatakaSmt Muniyamma v. State of Karnataka

Dismissed¶48

Smt Muniyamma v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC2 Feb 2026WP/10103/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: withdrawal memo; amicable settlement / out-of-court settlement; dismissal on memo; KIADB land acquisition (LA-KIADB); proceedings No.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24; referral of KIADB proceedings to competent civil court; Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India; Kundana Hobli / Devanahalli Taluk / Doddaballapur Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District; parties Muniyamma, Beeramma, Renukamma, Anjinamma versus State of Karnataka, KIADB, Special Land Acqusition Officer - II (BMICP), Hotteppa, Rajamma, Mylarappa, Mune Gowda; counsel Sri Uday K. S.; NC: 2026:KHC:5669; Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav. Citation utility: petition dismissed on a consensual withdrawal memo; contains no ratio on compulsory referral of KIADB LAQ proceedings to a civil court; cite, if at all, only as an instance of withdrawal following settlement between parties.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; the petition was dismissed in light of the withdrawal memo recording amicable out-of-court settlement between the petitioners and the respondents.

Why is it important?

Upon learned counsel for the petitioners filing a memo recording that the petitioners and respondents had settled the dispute amicably outside Court and did not intend to prosecute the petition further, this Court dismissed the writ petition. The Court made no ruling on the referral question. ¶48

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; the petition was dismissed in light of the withdrawal memo recording amicable out-of-court settlement between the petitioners and the respondents.

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent No.3 (Special Land Acqusition Officer - II, (BMICP), KIADB) should be directed to refer the proceedings bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24 (Annexure-F1 and F2) to the competent civil court.

Ratio / Principle

Upon learned counsel for the petitioners filing a memo recording that the petitioners and respondents had settled the dispute amicably outside Court and did not intend to prosecute the petition further, this Court dismissed the writ petition. The Court made no ruling on the referral question.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P. No. 10103 of 2024 (LA-KIADB) (NC: 2026:KHC:5669), High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, order dated 02-02-2026 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S Sunil Dutt Yadav: Four petitioners filed this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct respondent No.3 (Special Land Acqusition Officer - II (BMICP), Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board) to refer the proceedings bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24 at Annexure-F1 and F2 to the competent civil court. Respondents comprised the State of Karnataka, the KIADB, the SLAO-II (BMICP), and Hotteppa together with Smt. Rajamma, Mylarappa and Mune Gowda. When the petition came on for orders, learned counsel filed a memo stating that the petitioners and the respondents had settled the dispute amongst themselves amicably outside the Court and did not intend to prosecute the petition further. In light of the memo, the Court dismissed the petition. No adjudication was made on the referral question.

A

1 -

NC: 2026:KHC:5669 WP No. 10103 of 2024

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 10103 OF 2024 (LA-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

SMT. MUNIYAMMA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS D/O HOTTEPPA W/O MUNISHAMMAPPA

R/AT SUNNAGHATTA VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

SMT. BEERAMMA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS D/O HOTTEPPA W/O MUNIYAPPA,

Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

R/AT MELINANAYAKARANDAHALLI VILLAGE TUBAGERE HOBLI

DODDABALLAPUR TALUK

BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

SMT. RENUKAMMA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS D/O HOTTEPPA W/O KRISHNAPPA R/AT SUNNAGHATTA VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

SMT. ANJINAMMA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:5669 WP No. 10103 of 2024

HC-KAR

D/O HOTTEPPA, W/O KATAPPA R/AT BEERASANDRA VILLAGE KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

… PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. UDAY K. S., ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU - 560 001.

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

SPECIAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER - II, (BMICP) KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO. 39, SHANTHIGRUHA BHARATHA SCOUT AND GUIDE BUILDING 4^TH FLOOR, PALACE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

HOTTEPPA AGED ABOUT 92 YEARS S/O LATE JUNJAPPA.

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:5669 WP No. 10103 of 2024

HC-KAR

SMT. RAJAMMA AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS W/O HOTTEPPA.

MYLARAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O HOTTEPPA.

MUNE GOWDA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS S/O HOTTEPPA

4 TO 7 ARE RESIDING AT KODIHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 561 203.

… RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. K. P. YASHODA, AGA FOR R1; SRI. GOPAL V. BILALMANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3; SRI. S. VENUGOPALA, ADVOCATE FOR R5 & R6; SRI. N. SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R7)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.3 TO REFER THE PROCEEDINGS BEARING NO.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24 AT ANNEXURE-F1 AND F2 TO THE COMPETENT CIVIL COURT.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:5669 WP No. 10103 of 2024

HC-KAR

ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo

which reads as hereunder:

"The petitioners submit that the petitioners and the respondents have settled the dispute amongst them amicably outside the Court, as such they do not intend to prosecute the above petition anymore and would withdraw the same. Hence, this memo.

WHEREFORE, the petitioners humbly pray that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to permit the petitioners to withdraw the above petition in the interest of justice and equity."

In light of the memo filed, the petition is

dismissed .

Sd/(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE

VP

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether respondent No.3 (Special Land Acqusition Officer - II, (BMICP), KIADB) should be directed to refer the proceedings bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24 (Annexure-F1 and F2) to the competent civil court.¶37

Statutes considered

2 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶37 Article 227¶37

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Proceedings bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24 (Annexure-F1 and F2), which the petitioners prayed be referred to the competent civil court by respondent No.3; no adjudicated order under challenge is described in the text.¶37
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (file with Special Land Acqusition Officer - II, (BMICP)), inferred from respondent No.3 to whom referral was sought

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Smt. Muniyamma¶9
SRI. UDAY K. S.
petitioner
Smt. Beeramma¶12
SRI. UDAY K. S.
petitioner
Smt. Renukamma¶17
SRI. UDAY K. S.
petitioner
Smt. Anjinamma¶18
SRI. UDAY K. S.
respondent
State of Karnataka, represented by its Principal Secretary, Department of Commerce and Industries¶25
SMT. K. P. YASHODA
respondent
The Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board, represented by its Chief Executive Officer¶26
SRI. GOPAL V. BILALMANE
respondent
Special Land Acqusition Officer - II, (BMICP), Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board¶27
SRI. GOPAL V. BILALMANE
respondent
Hotteppa¶28
respondent
Smt. Rajamma¶31
SRI. S. VENUGOPALA
respondent
Mylarappa¶32
SRI. S. VENUGOPALA
respondent
Mune Gowda¶33
SRI. N. SHIVAKUMAR

Coram

AI extract

S Sunil Dutt Yadavauthor¶39

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Karnataka HC
Decided on: 2 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 2 Apr 2024
Case no.: WP/10103/2024
CNR: KAHC010187812024
Topic: Writ and Judicial Review
Bench: S Sunil Dutt Yadav
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: Writ Petition (LA-KIADB)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from S Sunil Dutt Yadav

Smt. Manikyamma Vs Union of India
30 Jan 2026
Sri. Sadananda. C Vs the State of Karnataka
30 Jan 2026
Smt. G S Geetha Vs the State of Karnataka
30 Jan 2026
Sri Channegowda, Vs State of Karnataka
2 Feb 2026
Smt. Subbalakshmi S Vs Deputy Commissioner and Arbitrator
2 Feb 2026
Dr Vishwanath Shetty Vs State of Karnataka
2 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Smt Muniyamma v. State of Karnataka, WP/10103/2024 (KA), decided on 2 February 2026.

The High Court of Karnataka publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes2

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226 · Article 227

View all statutes

Procedural history1

Proceedings bearing No.KIADB/LAQ/4257/2023-24 (Annexure-F1 and F2), which the petitioners prayed be referred to the competent civil court by respondent No.3; no adjudicated order under challenge is described in the text.Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (file with Special Land Acqusition Officer - II, (BMICP)), inferred from respondent No.3 to whom referral was sought

View full history

Bench / Coram

S Sunil Dutt Yadav

Parties & counsel