Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
K S HEMALEKHA
SMT INDIRA DEVI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
ORDER :
K.S. HEMALEKHA, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the preliminary and final notification dated 11.02.1988 (Annexure-B) and 24.02.1989 (Annexure-C), issued under Sections 4(1) and 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (‘the Act, 1894’ for short) and for declaration that the acquisition in respect of land measuring 1 acre 10 guntas in Sy.No.4 of Jakkur Plantation, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk (‘petition land’ for short), has lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (‘Act, 2013’ for short). Further to declare that respondent No.3 has no legal right, title or interest over the land measuring 1 acre 10 guntas in Sy.No.4 of Jakkur Plantation, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, as per the settlement agreement dated 16.02.1994.
2. The petition land, originally belonged to the petitioner's father-J.M. Krishnappa, who had purchased it under a registered sale deed dated 15.04.1962. The petition land was notified for acquisition in 1988-1989 for the benefit of the respondent No.3-society. Krishnappa challenged the said acquisition in W.P.No.7084/19
Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act does not create a new cause of action to question finalized land acquisition proceedings where possession was taken and compensation paid.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – After acquisition of land and passing of award, land vests in State free from all encumbrances – Vesting of land with State is with possession – Any person reta....
Once possession is taken by the State after acquisition, the land vests in the State free from all encumbrances. The deposit of compensation in the Government Treasury prior to the enforcement of the....
Once possession is taken and an award is passed, challenges to land acquisition proceedings are not maintainable, and remedies for compensation must be sought through reference proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for lapsing of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, both the conditions of physical possession and payment of compe....
The petition under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 must meet the gap period of five years, and the physical possession and compensation tender must be valid. The essentiality of the land for public ....
(1) Courts should adjudicate on all issues and give its findings on all issues and not to pronounce judgment only on one of issues.(2) Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – There being delay in pass....
No reasonable explanation being given by the petitioners for such inordinate delay, this court should not go into the stale demand of the petitioners after lapse of years.
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
