Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Anthony Raju, S/o Late Mr.Rayappa @ Rajanna – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an order dated 08-03-2022 passed by the Bangalore Development Authority (‘BDA’ for short) and seeking a consequential direction to sanction the plan on the basis of the application submitted by the petitioners for development and construction of an apartment building.
2. Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: -
The father of the petitioners was the absolute owner and in possession of the subject property in Sy.No.75 of Rachenahalli Village, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bangalore East Taluk measuring 2 acres 08 guntas. The said land comes to be converted from agriculture to residential purpose in terms of the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 11-02-2003. Consequent upon the death of the father of the petitioners, all these petitioners are said to have inherited the subject property. The property coming within the jurisdiction of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (‘BBMP’ for short) khatha and all other municipal records got transferred into the names of these petitioners. It is the submission that taxes have been paid by these petitioners up to date.
3. On 17-07-2019 the petitioners submit an application fo
The designation of land for public purposes under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning Act does not lapse after a specified time, but the rights of property owners must be balanced against long de....
Since the property is not designated as compulsorily acquired land, there is no requirement for the Government to take the appropriate action envisaged under section 67 of the Act, 2016 can never be ....
The impugned requirement to surrender properties for road widening as a precondition for building plan approval violated property rights under Article 300A of the Constitution of India and the Karnat....
Point of Law : petitioners cannot be deprived of their properties earmarked as road in the revised Master Plan, 2015 merely because they intend to develop their properties by obtaining sanctioned bui....
Failure to acquire land within three years results in automatic release from reservation under Section 38 of the Town and Country Planning Act.
Property rights remain intact unless formally acquired, and compensation is owed for land utilized by the state without due process under Article 300A of the Constitution.
Planning authority cannot mandate gift deed for street alignment land as precondition for permission; violates Article 300A, lacks statutory basis, bypasses acquisition with compensation under T&CP A....
Land is deemed released from reservation if not acquired within three years as per Section 38 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
Failure to acquire land within three years from publication of a development plan results in deemed release from reservation under Section 38 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1971.
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
