Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
D.K.SINGH, TARA VITASTA GANJU
Ammayamma W/o Late G. Krishnappa Since Deceased by Her LRs. Gangamma K. – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
D.K. SINGH, J.
1. These two writ appeals arise out of the judgment and order dated 08.04.2024 passed in W.P.No.10331/2013 (LA-BDA).
2. Parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition, for sake of convenience.
3. The petitioners' had filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking a declaration that the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands of the petitioners under the Preliminary Notification bearing No.BDA/SLAO/A4-PR:194/2002-03 dated 07.11.2002 published in the Official Gazette dated 21.11.2002, as Illegal and void ab initio and further that the petitioners' peaceful possession and enjoyment of the lands on the basis of the Final Notification bearing No.UDD/750/LAQ:2003 dated 09.09.2003 published in the Official Gazette on 10.09.2003 or on the basis of the Notification issued under Section 16(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, bearing No.BDA/SLAO/A5/PR/45/2006-07 dated 29.05.2007, should not be disturbed on account of lapsing of the scheme.
4. Petitioners claim to be the owners in possession of the following lands :-
The Preliminary Notification dated 07.11.2002 was notifying 1,532 acres and 17 guntas of Lands comprised in 8 Villages viz., Vajra
The court held that subsisting interest is essential for maintaining land acquisition challenges, and statutory compliance prevails over claims of lapse unless proven otherwise.
The court established that an acquisition may lapse if not substantially implemented within a reasonable timeframe, affirming the landowner's right to challenge ineffective acquisitions.
Failure to demonstrate legal possession invalidates land acquisition; lapse of the acquisition scheme confirmed by statutory mandates.
Lapsing of Scheme in my considered opinion would invalidate designation of property as a civic amenity and all further actions taken in connection thereto, if Scheme is not implemented in respect of ....
Acquisition proceedings lapse as government fails to take possession and pass awards within reasonable time; prior court liberties enable claims for de-notification.
Acquisition proceedings under the Bangalore Development Authority Act lapsed due to non-implementation, lack of possession, and failure to pay compensation, affirming abandonment in line with precede....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Right which has been lost due to passage of time cannot be revived by virtue of deposit of amount subsequent to orders of High Court.
The court confirmed that land acquisition remains valid despite claims of abandonment if possession was taken and the scheme implemented as per law.
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
