Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. Nagaprasanna
B.R.Muralidhar, S/O B.V.Rathan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka By The Secretary Department Of Housing – Respondent
ORDER :
M. Nagaprasanna, J.
Batch of these petitions call in question a notification declaring the subject properties in these petitions to be a slum under the provisions of the Karnataka Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act 1973 (‘the Act’ for short).
2. Heard Sri M Shivaprakash, learned counsel appearing for petitioner in W.P.No.22611 of 2005; Sri Abhinav Ramanand, learned counsel appearing for petitioner in W.P.No.20955 of 2005; Sri L.M. Chidanandayya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.21192 of 2005, Sri K.S. Rahul Cariappa, learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents/State and Sri B.B.Patil, learned counsel appearing for the Board.
3. Before embarking upon consideration of the issue on its merit, I deem it appropriate to notice the protagonists in the case at hand. The petitioner in W.P.No.21192 of 2005 is M/s Chandra Spinning & Weaving Mills Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Company’ for short); Respondents 1 and 2 are the State in the Department of Housing and Respondent No.3 is the Karnataka Slum Clearance Board. In Writ Petition No.20955 of 2005 the petitioner is an individual land owner and the respondents are the s
The court held that long delays in land acquisition proceedings violate constitutional rights, rendering acquisition invalid, and declared compensation provisions under Section 20 unconstitutional fo....
The judgment emphasizes that lapsing provision under Section 11A does not apply to acquisitions made by Nagpur Improvement Trust under NIT Act, while also highlighting entitlement to compensation for....
The right to property under Article 300A must be upheld through due legal processes; unlawful dispossession by state authorities mandates compensation per statutory requirements.
Compulsory acquisition of land – If any individual is to be divested or deprived of said right by State, it ought not be done without giving compensation in accordance with law for land so acquired f....
The court ruled that the State Land Acquisition Officer cannot shift the date for determining compensation; only higher courts possess that authority under Articles 32/142 of the Constitution.
The acquisition process must comply with statutory provisions of timely final notification and personal hearing, failure of which undermines legal validity.
Point of law: Co operative society - Encroachment of Land - Right to fair compensation - Concept of equity, justice and good conscience is part of Indian law and can be applied by the Courts in certa....
Failure to specify public purpose in a land acquisition notification renders it void ab initio.
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
