Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

The Commissioner vs R. Adhikesavulu Naidu on 25 August, 2025

Author: Aravind Kumar

Bench: Aravind Kumar

                                                                           SLP(C) No. 10058/2023

     ITEM NO.47                              COURT NO.13                    SECTION IV-A

                                 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                         Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 10058/2023

     [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 31-01-2023
     in WA No. 15015/2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at
     Bengaluru]

     THE COMMISSIONER & ANR.                                          Petitioner(s)

                                                  VERSUS

     R. ADHIKESAVULU NAIDU & ORS.                                     Respondent(s)

     WITH

     SLP(C) No. 17669/2023 (IV-A)

     Date : 25-08-2025 These mattes were called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
                           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

     For Petitioner(s) :
                                      Mr. Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Adv.
                                      Mr. S.K. Kulkarni, Adv.
                                      Mr. M. Gireesh Kumar, Adv.
                                      Mr. Ankur S. Kulkarni, AOR
                                      Ms. Uditha Chakravarthy, Adv.
                                      Mr. Tarun, Adv.
     For Respondent(s) :
                                      Ms. Kiran Suri, Sr. Adv.
                                      Mr. S.J. Amith, Adv.
                                      Mr. Ajay Kadkol, Adv.
                                      Ms. Aishwarya Kumar, Adv.
                                      Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, AOR
                                      Mr. Prakhar Singh, Adv.
                                      Ms. Thanuja V., Adv.

                                      Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Sr. Adv.
                                      Mr. Pratibhanu Singh Kharola, Adv.
                                      Mr. Girish Agarwal, Adv.
Signature Not Verified                Ms. Sansriti Pathak, AOR
Digitally signed by
Deepak Guglani
Date: 2025.08.26
17:07:52 IST
Reason:                               Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, AOR

                                      Mr. Vikram Hegde, AOR

                                                    1
                                                                       SLP(C) No. 10058/2023

                         Mr. Vishwanath, Adv.
                         Mr. Abhinav Hansaraman, Adv.
                         Mr. Ashutosh Yadav, Adv.

                         Mr. D.L. Chidananda, AOR
                         Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, A.A.G.

             UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following
                                 O R D E R

We find from the record that the earlier Division Benches’ judgments of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, and more particularly, the judgment dated 14.09.2017 in Writ Appeal No. 3353/2016 and 5170-5174/2016 (LA-BDA), categorically held that the scheme, that is, J.P. Nagar VIII Phase Scheme, had already lapsed. This judgment was tested before this Court in SLP(C) Nos. 26800- 26805/2018, titled “Bangalore Development Authority & Anr. vs. Sampangi & Ors.”, and the same were dismissed.

Apart from the clear findings recorded by the earlier Division Benches of the High Court, which have now been followed by the Division Bench presently, vide the impugned judgments and orders dated 31.01.2023 and 06.02.2023, we find that the learned Judge of the High Court, by judgment dated 27.07.2011, had exhaustively dealt with all aspects of the matter and conclusively held against the Bangalore Development Authority on lapsing of the proceedings in the context of Section 27 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act. The learned Judge categorically held that possession of the subject lands was not taken before the scheme lapsed and the lands never vested in the State Government prior to such lapsing. These findings have been confirmed in appeal time and again. The mere factum of the petitioners before the High Court being subsequent 2 SLP(C) No. 10058/2023 purchasers would not come to the aid of the Bangalore Development Authority in saving the lapsed scheme. We, therefore, find no good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgments and orders, given these peculiar facts in the present cases. The special leave petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

(DEEPAK GUGLANI)                                  (AVGV RAMU)
    AR-cum-PS                                  COURT MASTER (NSH)




                                 3