Smt P G Vimala vs State Of Karnataka on 7 March, 2011

[Cites 6, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Smt P G Vimala vs State Of Karnataka on 7 March, 2011

Bench: B.V.Nagarathna

   
    

V .,,
/4%

n W 2 ;..

 
    

1:',  / v  . ._ V "vv, » /

and therefore, the issuance of tbs Notiﬁcation uxiclgr
section 43(1) of the LA Act, de~natifying the  
Land ﬂ-cm aoqubitian was wholly illegal  K
notziﬁczation impugned in mg  
notification is in accordnnc:e km: mik 
for any intc.-rferenm in time    aka
the    Vposawsion of
the  that, the ma
   cannot be agﬁzatcd
   upcn certs-u';r1 decisions with
  which possession of the lands
V  he has contrsndad that, when once
'     been upheld in the instant case, the
W   the petiﬁorlem have is as has been

V_,\.-.g'.':uI'6.! cur memNAlAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH CDURT OF KARNA'TA.KA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HiG

A  by the Division Bcnoh of this court and

«wan:-u1,H!.I Its}! I

 f'>§:titisone1*u'Wr1t' petitions haw: to be d;'mE:.sa' ed.

rm,' '

/,.

1 »..«1-.c

 



... .\.--m.wm»m,n r1ur.;,s.m_t.x.rIJt~:I Ur KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H

 

   

21. Learned Gove1'r1rm-ant Phader has aupportpd

that the notiﬁcation damd 07.00.2010   %
Section 48(1) of the LA; Act was 

haw and mci-arm... within a_ few  

notification dated 28.06.2010    to
rectrlijr the crrtmeaoua ._;§0§u¢d  and
interference in    00 

22.  far the respective
parties,  T'  arises for my
 is,  the lat respondent was

r1g' ht    'idea dated 20.00.2010.

     tbs undisputed facts in these

  have to be set out. It in mm: in

    petitioners purchased the lands in
" registered sale deed dated 10.03.1933; that,
K A  had issued rmﬁfwaﬁon seeking to acquire the

VA  abng with the other Emztiu Luuier Sections 1'?
 19 of tm am Act far the formation of Arkavathi

L, .

/' r'



_  .__.,....m.. K)!' su:u<N.£3.'I'A&(A HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH coum" or KARNATAKA mam couar or KARNATAKA HIGH'

 

1

Vi  [W  V . V V' w .

 

13

Layout; The pctitiorxnra had challenged the 

and a Icarned Single Judge of this: court  M

-  /wm

   

    

the acquisition. However, a DIVE' '  A A_ :1 of

by order dated 25.11.2005  

2005 Hart 313 in raw (use  &
cm :13. Stan: of-Kwnatakq   had
upheld the acquisiﬁon   
granted tn    own-era. 'File
operative   in so
ﬁar as it:  who had

  an follows:

&  :*,r1,1_ W.4f¢d§.2624/2005, 2625/200.5,
  2775/zoos med by EDA.
 ﬁled by the Government,
L W.AN¢A2712/2005 filed by the former Chief
 1  W.ANo.2 76012005 are allowed.
 impugned onier passed by the
 learned Single Judge dated 25.042005 is



 

mm 1 ..,uunn vr rw.sv.N;u.z--x:sA t*2IA1,:L*1_£..Ul.II(l OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF l*(ARNATA.KA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIC

X / ,_  .;~:f::. _ '-"'-»"- .'.e_;-- "V  

 

(B}iIT1eimpugnadn~:mar¥csmadeagcn'n3r

Sn'.S_M.Kr1'.shna, the ﬁannerr Ch£efMim'.ster  
Kw-natczkcx, as sex our in paragmph Na.3_(§;'bfV:-..j: ;_. 
the impugned order as extracted b1pm*agru{pVh?.'_T.::~ ''

83 ofthis order, are hereby expiinged.

(C) The aoqzzisiﬁan of the  far-.   
ﬁannaﬁon of     

aw,-"cam theﬁvﬂowina   % 
(a; In .190 ﬁzr as    
they are entities: to 

snag  swag  for
atzoanemi 
  Rates, 1564,

   ﬁom today

gexmmzazzw   month by EDA, If
 regxstration fee. They

 »A  notpuy  theirsihas have
  and they have agreed not In
 in regard to the sites

&  ' mepeazioners shall file appliaztiorrs
 aszazmem ofsim to EDA wid-tin three
imonthsﬂomtodayinthepmsafbedjbmt

statingthattheyar'eapplfcxzn£swhowe1'ethe

ﬂ .



F

 
 

Pbtﬁzhners shat} be given six months was jbr 
making payment (To enable petitionem 
know the amotmt afmmpensaﬁon which may    %
we: be entitled and to asaertam how  A

an Irtnm W ""01  I %
to the survey ruzmbem   or   .
pa-utzaners we in   
challenged, EDA shall  mi
stm/{and m   

Section 3:: afthe    1394,

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H¥GH COURT OF KARNATAKA HI

fuii allotment uriﬁiin "t.?w--  

  .....

.§;'7.q3z;;"oj"»gi¢s petitioners does not % fksrjzilimvzerzt aj'20' x 30' sites as cmtdningirwmuiue srtxhaneﬁnr my ﬂtepwpoae schgmeﬂsudx wig be /"I teeny": \..vur\I ur IKAMNAIAKA !'1E£:.:--l'*..,_l.'0U}'ETOF KLARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF ataII,are'permz£t1e.'dtomaIoa appmpdaw appﬁcaﬁon to and exemption and documents to é such request keeping. in mirzd "_t;I-.é';~;-;gztus'o}*Arhe.¥ land as on the dcmé' and w Amﬁﬁmm 'to V ~-- owners whose lands nofz'_ﬁ£3£i,'iﬁ:v§'*'--.;i:v;;1d.sitiorz, notiﬁed and u;2'n7§e upheld and no ﬁnai A' V-"zifinjiaafign is In the event the EDA wncalusion that the lands of are similarly placed, than to $"fM.:H"'! \.n,:-urn Ur m.m.mm<;A rug,-V:»»:.,_:<;<';u:{'r or-' KARNATAKA HIGH COURT 0? KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH couwr or KARNATAKA HE " Pariah-net's who are interested in avaﬂirtg this beneﬁt ska}! make appmpriare appficazion within 30 daysﬁvm thedateofthisorderand tfwrecgﬂzr the EDA shelf give notice /2 land in Nagcwara village which is the subject matter of the czﬁ-resctid writ peﬁtion pg W.ANa.2?'.57/2005 £9 partiy ' In w.R2.5so7/2004 ﬁled Development Company in bearing syNos.17/1, 13,: 3L9, 2k<;:% .:2.-:5 cm<:i 7 % mam' at Hennur vuzage;k%Kasav:z'kHab&,%j 12 games, the Judge is the defetmg' the am of the policy csf dated 1.5.1995. On BDA wpwpﬁméj 3* '*3' Wm 'M?' is said exam: of zand mm in respect of the said a.--:e:z*;cne-am is at liberty toform V appeals are disposed cfin terms of Qftierpassedirzthese writ appeals : ' E <1 2 Z 3 L!..

O 5--

:x:

:3 O U 1".

E 3 <1 2 2 Q:

<:

a;

LL.

9- :1: :2 C3 U I E x .4 ad :5 <5 2 ac <:

x U. 0 &-

oz :3 0 «.2 3:

2:

«x E Z 3 LL 0 i=-

2.:

:3 O 4 Q 2 C:

<1 :4 L).

O 5- C:

:3 O «.2 x :3 E . :'un.Ir1 -.um.«m ur r\.L'mNAIAn;£\r1!t.-:3-l §.,.£..«I.§..It(l ur 1<.ARNATAi<A HIGH CCYURT OF KARHATAKA HIGH CCIURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH 33

33. At thh sings, it would be relevant no mnaiéiar resporxdent which also End a plan»: in the T' ' EDA. On the appljcawn made though an approval of." 'V made by the sum was romwed by 1: 72 only on O5.02.200?', 38-3 of the BDA Ag; bemi%% of the 4m respnrﬁent. by another order dated sale deed dated

25.o4.2ocr? in favuur of the 4m zwmpongieiit. by one more salt: deed lands in question in than: writ mailer the sale dead dated .. ";"i'1crcaftt:rf'V' , thc poaaesaion Of the said lands over tn the 49' respondent -- society.

_ has bean issued by the BDA and um AT %%j§mr1g cum dated 11.04.2008 has been issued in ﬁavuur 5:" thus 4m re-sporxslcnt and by order datcd 31.12.2005 /I .

rtrmrr \..:.:ur<t ur IKAKNAIAIKA HI£:}H*¢i;OUI'('l' OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATABZA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 39 sazwﬁon for formation of layout has been ﬁauad byfthc BD.&. No doubt, these pro-ceedinga have during' the pcndczmy of the: matters T' ' Court, but an already stated, the S the albommnt made by the cannot be gone inns in these Vthey are the subject matter 128i28cf2U10. H V» %V

34. oontcntism of issued ﬁat was in order in as of the lands bekmgmg' to me 313% to be with the petitinnnm 3190' 'W Fad much as the award in favtzsur passed an early as on 21.{}6.'2CK)4 " "tn 1'1aniove.r possession on 05.11.2004 on % poaaeasiorz has been taken as is evkicnced A mahamr which is part ofthe records oftbc EDA.

x'I'h::n-Jere, from the recorda it booomw clear tit the. /2 /:M, W,' ".' possession cf the iands of the pctitﬁmcra had talcum an early as on 05.11.2004 and hence in the prooeedmgn with regard to the H by the petitioners seeking dmmgargmn poaseasﬁnn Irmd not yct "

cantzraryto records. M % V. V é_ V. 3

35. In this oonte:x£; i'$1e Lat the Bar with regard to of In the mag vs. The Pwytzbrao ars. reported in we stated that, after poes¢saia¥1'w.9f the subject matter of 'V in acoordamze with kthm Iaéﬁciéveata with the Govvemmgmt and rm jux-isdicﬁon to withdraw from land of which posamsicm has been H ah-o stated that, what the Act contemplates condition of veatirg of the hand Hz the at is the nature ofthe land admits of. There be :10 hard and fast ruk laying down veg: {act mu:-I wnuu ur r<.p.:<r~:AIAt<.Ar1z<:'r1 <;£:pJ:<'I' on: mamzcrmcp. men coum or: KARNATAVA HIGH CQURT or KARHATAKA men ccsum or KARNATAKA HIGH msmré -..uum ur mxrwmm :1ut§m«s§0uR'I' or KARNATAKA HIGH coum or KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HiGH COURT 0; !(AR.HATAi(A HI would be 3u.ff'micnt to oonstitutc taking of p<3sscsaion"--qf land. It in also not stricﬂy neomsary an a V requwe.met1' t that notice should be given to 'g::{:» T A' the occupant of the Rani; that, taken at a particular time, thtiughvéit ﬂay where posaib}e, to give much in mm by ma an { % In tlm casepf New new vs. ofNC?} Delhi & Clrs» 5;; is held that, while area of land with a large: of ﬂyi»:[%ki:«esu1;1 be ixnpoasible for the Collect-gar' at t;ﬁ'iciak ta enter each bigha or poasaas """ H ion and a pragmaub approach the-Court. It is also stated that . eznc ofﬁw cf talcirgpoasesaian and hariclixg it % tax is the-recording ofa % which can itself oomtitutr: mrldcrm of the >'.'4;wmdamoMuym&m . t s~m.:sr~z uvum ur KAKNAIAKA HI1.fgH*§7;'0URT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H15 sud1po.sse.ssion.

If mud: notiﬁcation is pubiished, the same shall be the oonciusw' 937- '* Proof of takmg' over P0%6:93Io' n of the' " 2- acquired and any other interpretatiarg be contrary to the spin': mu:

153; of the LA.Ac:1t. " " L7 16(2) as to the taking W wzwwd-' PM if ewdenoe' to hold mc::".v,;zrwdy been tsscuarwe' or 16:2), in our to taking over poms:-mioviv _ tand, as provided :25; 'xi proof of taking = on the ground that czctuai ~ not taken, in our considered £9 contrary to the legal preswnpiicm I' 1 Tsuppanrea by Sediorz 15(2) of the z._4..4¢ the mu-ismzarwe of gweafe undersecdon I6(2)ir: the instant [oa2se,wiIInotinanyw:2;ybeaground£ao aanhend that the respondent - EDA had not /5"

su-Jr: uvuru x.-r r\I-\tU"{All\i'\Ar1lU|'1 3;.-U._lJi-{I Ur KARNATAKA HIGH CQURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH CCJURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA taken over possession ofthe impugned land ﬁ'om tfzeperiﬁoners/appeHm1Ls.' 3'7. From the said decision 1'1: ' mm hsuanoc of the gazette 15(2) ofthe LA Act mum not he 3% contend that the EDA had of WA.No.409/.2_C?:$>A::%iat$§i__A€= while goirxg through those cases lms noticed 'was passed, noticca were issued and 14 of the LA. Act at a mahamr had been drawn that poaaessinn had been talnan. In am basis arm moorda ma1'nta1'x3::d by the fact that rxstioea ma been issued to the passing of the awards and also with the taking of posaasaicm mahamr being this court came to the oonchmion that posasessirxn which in fact been taken by the EDA.

/W 2 W .y.».uw<;wulA wwww-mu Wu w%.d°:'°skV«i:'<l,x'**1¢tt;5'WR1JVuWVwLF£LL'\mk7'S§i$ mgﬁgmfakﬁ MW" i§'wﬁ»?t-z§"5:,§"'ﬂ;F~'%»W'«'9.11f'M593L E"'%lWu£2I3E""§ '%m%»W.,«5§"€§ W? %ﬁ"§N.E*"Q.f'<§§ﬂu§'€z.A3:% ?'§Egxéig"$ ﬂ

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court