SRI LAKSHMINARAYANA v. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 s. 29(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. In view of the said decisions, the impugned general award is quashed and respondent No.3 is directed to pass a consent award as contemplated under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, in the light of the consent given by the petitioners for the acceptance…
- Para 66. It is needless to state that if any objections are raised by any other parties, the general award that has already been passed would stand revived. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
Judgment
1. SRI LAKSHMINARAYANA S/O LATE BALE KRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.45 1ST MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS, MARUTHINGAR, BENGALURU NORTH, BENGALURU 560064,
2. SMT ASHWATHAMMA W/O LATE SRINIVASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.60, KODICHARAVU VILLAGE SRINIVASPURA TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT 563135.
3. SMT GOWRAMMA W/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDING AT MIDIGESHI VILLAGE, MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT 572132.
4. SMT NAGARATHNAMMA W/O VENKATARAVANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.45, 1ST MAIN ROAD, 9TH CROSS, MARUTHINGAR, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU 560064.
5. SMT VENKATALAKSHMAMMA Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:15900 WP No. 8224 of 2024 W/O VENKATESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT THUBGERE VILLAGE, DODDABALLAPUR TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 561203.
6. SRI AKKAYAMMA W/O SUBBARAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.47/31, PALYA VILLAGE, CHANNARAYAPATTANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT 562110 (BY SRI. NAGENDRA C S., ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONERS
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560001, BY ITS SECRETARY.
THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD NO.14/3, CFC BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU 560001.
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2 THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, CFC BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR MAHARSHI ARAVINDA BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BENGALURU 560001. (BY SMT. B.P.RADHA, AGA FOR R-1; SRI. P.V.CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-3) …RESPONDENTS - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:15900 WP No. 8224 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE GENERAL WARDS DATED 20/06/2023 AND IT WAS SIGNED ON 28/07/2023 BEARING NO. KIADB/LAQ.2320.2023- 24 VIDE ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT, ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER
1. The prayer in this Writ Petition is to quash the general award that was passed on 28.07.2023 and for issuance of a direction to the respondents to consider passing of a consent award as contemplated under Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short, ‘the KIAD Act’).
2. It is the contention of the petitioners that a General award was passed, since there was a dispute between the claimants and there was a litigation pending between the claimants in O.S. No.721/2014, as a result of which, they did not opt for package compensation, as has been offered in respect of other lands covered under the same Notification. - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:15900 WP No. 8224 of 2024
3. It is the case of the petitioners that the litigation between the claimants ultimately ended in a compromise on 07.10.2023 and therefore, all of them have now come forward to claim compensation as per the package offered to the other lands covered under the Notification.
This Court, in similar cases, has quashed the general awards and has directed the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (for short, ‘the KIADB’) to consider the claim of the land owners for award of compensation by consent, as contemplated under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, making it clear that in the event any dispute arose regarding the entitlement, the general award would revive.
In view of the said decisions, the impugned general award is quashed and respondent No.3 is directed to pass a consent award as contemplated under Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act, in the light of the consent given by the petitioners for the acceptance of the package offered by the KIADB. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:15900 WP No. 8224 of 2024
It is needless to state that if any objections are raised by any other parties, the general award that has already been passed would stand revived. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
The KIADB shall also be at liberty to withdraw the general award amount, which it had deposited before the Civil Court. Sd/- JUDGE HNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.