Back
ALOK ARADHE, ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
M. Srinivasa – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of land acquisition disputes (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contentions of land owner regarding review proceedings (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of procedural compliance (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. setting aside dismissal for lack of hearing (Para 17) |
| 5. conclusion to hear writ petitions afresh (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT :
Alok Aradhe, J. - These intra court appeals, which have been filed by the land owner emanate from the common order dated 01.03.2019 passed in W.P.No.51417- 51433/2016 and in review petition Nos.512/2016 and 513/2016.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of these appeals briefly stated are that the land owner and his brother viz., M.Krishnappa were owners of land measuring 4 acres and 9 guntas of Sy.No.97/1 situate at Uttarahalli Village, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the schedule land' for short). The appellant filed writ petitions viz., W.P.No.35912/2016 and W.P.No.35193/2016 seeking to challenge the preliminary as well as final notifications issued for acquisition of the land dated 29.12.1988 and 07.12.1999. In the said writ petition, the land owner did not implead the beneficiary of the acquisition viz., Poorna Prajana Hous
Court can exercise its power of review only when there is an error apparent on the face of the record and an error which is to be fished out by a process of reasoning cannot be said to be an error ap....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that writ petitions suffering from inordinate delay and laches, and barred by principles of res judicata, may not be entitled to equitable relief u....
The court clarified that subsequent changes in law do not permit review of earlier judgments under established principles of review jurisdiction, emphasizing the notion of finality in judicial decisi....
Completed land acquisitions under 1894 Act immune from Section 24(2) 2013 Act challenge if possession taken and compensation deposited prior.
Title dispute - Court in exercise of power under article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot determine the question of title - Single Judge has rightly relegated the parties to avail of the remed....
The executing court cannot go beyond the decree and must respect prior adjudications regarding entitlement to compensation, as established by the doctrine of merger.
Acquisition of land – Only a person interested can challenge judgment and award passed by Reference Court.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
