Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
D.K.SINGH, TARA VITASTA GANJU
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board – Appellant
Versus
C. Bhaskaran S/o Late P.K. Paniker – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties involved and appeal details. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioners' claims regarding property ownership and land acquisition. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's decision on compensation entitlement. (Para 8 , 17) |
| 4. appellants' arguments against the shifting of acquisition date. (Para 9 , 10 , 12) |
| 5. court's observations on the right to property and compensation. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. final conclusion and dismissal of appeals. (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT :
D.K. SINGH, J.
1. The present two appeals have been filed by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (hereinafter referred to as KIADB), as well as August Ventures Private Limited, who were respondent Nos.2 and 4, respectively before the writ court.
2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking in the writ petition for the sake of convenience.
3. The petitioners filed the writ petition before the learned Single Judge with following prayers:
“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or order Quashing notification bearing No. C1255SPQ2001 (P) dated 9.2.2004 under Section 28(1) of the KIAD Act, ANNEXURE B and final notification No.CI:126:SPQ: 2005 dated 19.12.2005 under Section 28(4) of KIAD Act ANNEXURE-D.
(ii)
The landowners are entitled to just compensation at current market value when delays in awarding compensation are not due to their actions.
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 right to property under Article 300A must be upheld through due legal processes; unlawful dispossession by state authorities mandates compensation per statutory requirements.
The State must comply with due process for land acquisition and compensate fairly; failure to follow procedures amounts to a constitutional violation.
The obligation to pay compensation for land acquired for public purposes is a fundamental requirement under both statutory law and constitutional provisions, and failure to do so constitutes a violat....
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 duty to compensate upon land acquisition is a constitutional safeguard, ensuring no individual is deprived of property without legal due process and fair compensation, embodied in Article 300A.
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....
Authorities must complete land acquisition proceedings within a reasonable timeframe; prolonged inaction constitutes a violation of constitutional rights under Article 300A.
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
