IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.494/2023 (LA-KIADB)

BETWEEN:

C.N. SRINIVASA RAO SINCE DECEASED.

1(a) SMT. NAGARATHNA S. RAO AGED ABOUT 89 YEARS W/O LATE C.N. SRINIVAS RAO.

Digitally signed by 2(b) C.S. HARISH ARSHIFA BAHAR AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS KHANAM S/O LATE C.N. SRINIVAS RAO.

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BOTH R/O NO.198-D

7TH B MAIN ROAD

3RD BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU 560011 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. S. KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV., FOR SRI. SEETHA RAMA RAO B.C. ADV.,)

AND:

1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT M S BUILDING BANGALORE 560001.

2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VISHVESHWARAYA MINI TOWER M S BUILDING, BANGALORE 560001.

3. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER/

EXECUTIVE MEMBER

2ND FLOOR, RASHTROTHANA PARISHATH BUILDING

14/3A, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE 560001.

4. BANGALORE METRO RAIL CORPORATION LTD REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC COMPLEX, K H ROAD BANGALORE 560027.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR R1 & R2 SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV., FOR R3 SRI. HARISH N.N. ADV., FOR R4)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT RENDERED IN WP NO.43719/2014, DATED 13/03/2023, AND TO GRANT THE PRAYER MADE IN THE WP NO.43719/2014 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE & EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This intra Court appeal is filed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 13.03.2023 passed in W.P.No.43719/2014 (LA-KIADB), wherein the writ petition filed by the appellants was dismissed.

2. Sri.S.Krishna Kishore, learned counsel appearing for Sri.B.C.Seetharama Rao, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the respondent-State has committed an error in constituting One Man Committee of Sri.Krishnappa and based on the recommendation of the said Committee, the compensation amount was determined which is contrary to law. It is submitted that the appellant is entitled for higher compensation than what is paid. However, the learned Single Judge has failed to consider the same and dismissed the writ petition. The Court failed to take note of the fact that the right to property is recognized under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal.

3. Per contra, Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel for the respondent No.3, Sri.Harish N.N, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 support the order of the learned Single Judge and submit that the appellant received the compensation under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the KIAD Act'), by executing the agreement wherein it is specifically agreed that he will not seek for higher compensation which has been rightly considered by the learned Single Judge and the writ petition was dismissed which does not call for any interference. Hence, they seek to dismiss the appeal.

4. We have heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3 and 4 and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by both the sides.

5. The appellant filed a writ petition under Article

226 of the Constitution of India seeking prayer to declare that the compensation awarded by the respondent to the appellant is arbitrary, illegal and unfair and seeks to quash the same and further relief to quash the acceptance of Sri.K