Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CJ, MR. C.M. POONACHA, J
SRI NAGARAJA REDDY S/O LATE CHIKKANNAIAH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPT. OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to land allotment and acquisition (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. background on land acquisition history (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. claim for restitution of land under bda act (Para 13) |
| 4. arguments against land denotification and entitlement (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. emphasis on bda act provisions and applicability (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. unsustainable claims for further challenges (Para 20 , 21) |
| 7. dismissal of the appeal (Para 22) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The appellants have filed the present appeal, impugning a judgment dated 19.03.2024 ['impugned order'] passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9180/2022 (BDA) captioned, 'Sri. Nagaraja Reddy & Others v. State of Karnataka & Others'.
3. Additionally, the appellants also prayed for directions to be issued to Bangalore Development Authority [BDA], to grant restitution of the subject land to the appellants, in terms of Section 39-C of the Bangalore Development Authority Act , 1976 [hereafter 'the BDA Act'].
5. The Court observed that the only right, if any, that the appellants could agitate was confined to a claim for compensation. However, one month after the Special Leave Petition had been dismissed, the appel
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
