Back
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
M.G.S. KAMAL, J
SRI K A BASITH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. evaluation of acquisition notifications and their implications on land ownership rights. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's right to pursue further legal remedies. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. disposal of writ petition confirms the court's directions regarding further action. (Para 5 , 6) |
ORAL ORDER
"(a) declare that the acquisition proceedings commenced by the Bangalore Development Authority by virtue of the Preliminary Notification No.BDA/ALAO/S/11/78-79 dated 27.06.1978 (Annexure-J) issued by the Secretary, BDA, Bengaluru and the Final Notification bearing No. HUD 567 MNX 84 dated 09.01.1985 (Annexure-K) issued by the Chairman, Housing & Urban Development Department, Bengaluru are deemed to have been lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re- settlement Act, 2013 and the right of the owners of the properties in question have been reverted back to the owner and also the acquisition proceedings is deemed to have been lapsed under Section 27 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 for failure to take physical possession of the land, Section 36 (3) has become inoperative so far as the lands of the
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
