SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Kar) 175

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
Alok Aradhe, M.G.S. Kamal, JJ.
Bangalore Development Authority – Petitioner
Versus
Offshore Holdings Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. – Respondents
W.A. NO.1966 OF 2013 (BDA) IN W.P. NO.41352 OF 2001 (BDA)
Decided On : 07-04-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. D.N. Nanjundareddy, Sr. Counsel For Mr. K. Krishna, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. A.K. Ganguly, Sr. Counsel For Mr. B.N. Prakaskh, Adv., Smt. Shwetha Krishnappa, AGA

Point of Law: In the absence of any statutory provision, which empowers the authority to modify the scheme on its own, it cannot be held that provisions of Sub-Section (5) and (6) are attracted.

Headnote:

Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 - Sections 4, 17(1) and 17(3) - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 11-A, 48(1) and 36(3) - Seeking compensation - Acquisition of land - Whether or not the scheme has lapsed - Guntas of land including the land bearing for formation of Rajmahal Vilas II Stage Layout - State Government thereafter published final Notification under Section 19 of the 1976 Act. It is pertinent to note out of 3 acres and 17 guntas of land –

Finding of the Court: Learned Single Judge on the aforesaid issue, Court refrain from examining aforesaid issue at instance of respondent who was the petitioner before the learned Single Judge, in intra court appeal - Authority has subsequently passed a resolution rescinding previous resolution action of passing of the second resolution cannot be termed as a fraud / over reach on the part of authority - It is also relevant to note neither any averment has been made in the writ petition scheme has lapsed under Section 27 of 1976 Act, nor aforesaid issue has been dealt with the learned Single Judge, therefore –

Result: Appeal is allowed

JUDGMENT :

ALOK ARADHE, J.

In this appeal preferred under Section 4 of Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 the appellants (hereinafter referred to as the 'Authority' for short) have assailed the validity of the order dated 14.12.2012 by which learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition preferred by respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company' for short) and proceeding for acquisition of the land initiated for benefit of the authority has been quashed. In order to appreciate the authority's challenge to the impugned order, few facts need mention, which are stated hereinafter.

FACTS:

2. Land bearing Sy.No.9/2 situate in Lottegollahalli Village, Bangalore North Taluk measuring 3 acres and 17 guntas was recorded in the revenue records in the names of Uttanallappa, S.Narimaiah, Muniswamappa, M.Narasimhappa and Hanumaiah (hereinafter referred to as 'the owners of the land' for short). The Authority issued a preliminary Notification under Section 17(1) and 17(3) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1976 Act' for short) for acquisition of 1316.04 and 1/2 guntas of land including the land bearing Sy.No.9/2 for formation of Rajmahal Vilas II Stage Layout. The State Government thereafter published final Notification under Section 19 of the 1976 Act. It is pertinent to note that out of 3 acres and 17 guntas of land, which was notified, 0.29 guntas of land was acquired by the Railways for formation of Mysore-Salem Railway line, an extent of 0.34 guntas were utilized by the authority for formation of Ring Road and 0.32 guntas of land was a built up area. Land measuring 1 acre and 2 guntas of Sy.No.9/2 is the subject matter of this appeal.

3. The owners of the land made applications on 20.12.1981 seeking compensation. Thereafter, they filed an a writ petition viz., W.P.No.16065-69/1987 before this court in which challenge was made to the proceedings initiated for acquisition of the land. During the pendency of the writ petition, the owners of the land on 18.06.1988 submitted a representation to the authority for deleting the land from acquisition proceedings. The Authority vide resolution dated 28.06.1988 resolved to recommend to the State Government to de-notify the land measuring 1 acre and 2 guntas. The Authority forwarded the recommendation to the State Government for appropriate action. The owners of the land on 22.09.1988 filed a memo seeking to withdraw the writ petition and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 22.09.1988. The State Government by a communication dated 26.12.1988 requested the Authority to send the status report of the case. The Authority by a communication dated 03.05.1989 informed the government about the withdrawal of the writ petition.

4. The Deputy Commissioner of the Authority by an endorsement dated 11.03.1991 issued to one M.Ramaiah informed him that in view of resolution No.1084 dated 28.06.1988, no acquisition proceedings are pending in respect of land in question. The State Government by a communication dated 16.02.1993 informed the Authority that file relating to de-Notification of the land in question is closed and directed the Authority to send a fresh proposal if it so chooses. Thereafter, by five sale deeds executed on 22.05.1985 and three sale deeds executed on 30.06.1998, the owners of the land sold the land to the company. The Authority vide resolution No.325/97 passed on 31.12.1997 resolved to rescind the earlier resolution No.874 dated 28.06.1988. Thereafter, a permission was granted by the authority to the company on 22.05.1996 to accord permission to construct culvert / bridge on an adjoining land, subject to terms and conditions mentioned in the aforesaid communication. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 09.03.1998 in pursuance of which, according to the authority, the possession of the land in question was taken

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top