Karnataka High Court
Smt. Kariyamma vs The State Of Karnataka on 19 March, 2018
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S. Bopanna
1 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17
C/w. W.P. No.42243/17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2018
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION Nos.45731 AND 46444/2017
C/w.
WRIT PETITION No.42243/2017 [LA-KIADB]
IN W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/2017:
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Kariyamma,
w/o. late Ramaiah,
aged 66 years,
2. Sri. Ramachandraiah K.R.,
s/o. late Ramaiah,
aged 42 years,
Both are r/at Kolalukunte Village
Hal Dodderi post, Kora Hobli,
Tumkur Taluk-572 128. ... PETITIONERS
[By Sri. Jagadish Baliga N., Adv.]
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka
By its Secretary
Department of Commerce
and Industries
Vidhana Soudha
Bangalore-01.
2. The Karnataka Industrial
Area Development Board
2 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17
C/w. W.P. No.42243/17
By its Chief Executive Officer
& Executive Member
4th and 5th Floors
Khanija Bhavan
Race Course Road
Bengaluru-560 001.
3. The Special Land Acquisition
Officer NIMZ
Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Board
I Floor, Maruthi Tower
Near SIT Main Gate
Tumkur - 572103. ... RESPONDENTS
[By Sri E S Indiresh, AGA., for R1.
Sri H L Pradeep Kumar, Adv. for R2 & R3.]
These Writ Petitions are filed u/Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the General
Award dated 20.12.2013 passed by respondent No.3 in
respect of bearing Sy.No.11 measuring 33.08 guntas and
Sy.No.13/1, measuring 1 acre 20 guntas of Bahujanahalli
village, Kora Hobli, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur District
belonging to petitioners is concerned vide Annexure-C and
direct the respondents herein to consider the case of the
petitioners as per Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act.
***
IN W.P. No.42243/2017:
BETWEEN:
Smt. Thimmakka,
w/o Doddaoblaiah
aged about 68 years
r/at Kolalakunte village,
Haldodderi post,
Kora Hobli, Tumkur Taluk-572 128. ... PETITIONER
[By Sri. Jagadish Baliga N., Adv.]
3 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17
C/w. W.P. No.42243/17
AND:
1. The State of Karnataka
By its Secretary
Department of Commerce
and Industries
Vidhana Soudha
Bangalore-01.
2. The Karnataka Industrial
Area Development Board
By its Chief Executive Officer
& Executive Member
Khanija Bhavan
4th and 5th Floors
Race Course Road
Bengaluru-01.
3. The Special Land Acquisition
Officer NIMZ
Karnataka Industrial Areas
Development Board
I Floor, Maruthi Tower
Near SIT Main Gate
Tumkur - 572103. ... RESPONDENTS
[By Sri E S Indiresh, AGA., for R1.
Sri H L Pradeep Kumar, Adv. for R2 & R3.]
This Writ Petition is filed u/Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India, praying to quash the General
Award dated 20.12.2013 passed by respondent No.3 in
respect of bearing Sy.No.15/1A2 measuring 4-00 acres of
Bahujanahalli village, Kora Hobli, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur
District belonging to petitioners is concerned vide
Annexure-C and direct the respondents herein to consider
the case of the petitioners as per Section 29(2) of the KIAD
Act.
***
These Writ Petitions coming on for preliminary
hearing, this day the Court made the following:
4 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17
C/w. W.P. No.42243/17
ORDER
The petitioners are before this Court assailing the General Award, impugned in these petitions. In that light, are seeking consideration of the case of the petitioners for payment of compensation made by the respondents in terms of the provisions contained in Section 29(2) of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 ['KIAD Act' for short].
2. The issue in W.P. Nos.45731 and 46444/2017 is related to the land in Sy.No.11 measuring 33.08 guntas and Sy.No.13/1, measuring 1 acre 20 guntas of Bahujanahalli village, Kora Hobli, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur District and in W.P. No.42243/2017 is related to the land in Sy.No.15/1A2 measuring 4-00 acres of Bahujanahalli village, Kora Hobli, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur District. The fact that the said lands are acquired and the compensation is payable is not in dispute. The only grievance herein is that the General Award as passed by the respondents is not justified and a consideration for payment of compensation is to be made in terms of Section 29(2) of the 5 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17 C/w. W.P. No.42243/17 KIAD Act. On this issue, a detailed consideration is not necessary inasmuch as the similar issue had arisen before this Court and this Court while considering similar contentions in W.P. No.6198/2015 dated 25.08.2015 [between Smt. Ningamma Vs. The State of Karnataka and Others], has held as hereunder:
"Petitioner is assailing the General Award dated 30th December 2013, Annexure-A, of the 3rd respondent-Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (for short 'KIADB') insofar as it relates to 1 acre 39 guntas in Sy. No.444 of Cheeluru village, Maralavadi Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District, on the premise that her claim for determination of compensation ought to be by way of an agreement under Sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short 'KIAD Act') since willing to the enter into an agreement after having obtained a compromise decree dated 6.12.2014 in O.S. 126/2013 whereunder the property in question is declared to be the absolute property of the petitioner.
2. Sub-section (2) of Section 29 of the 'KIAD Act' provides for determination of 6 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17 C/w. W.P. No.42243/17 compensation by an agreement and in the light of the compromise decree whereunder, the property in question has fallen to the exclusive share of the petitioner, is entitled to such a consideration, since it is stated that by such an agreement, petitioner would be entitled to a better price as compensation instead of determination under a general award, while acquisition proceeding would attain a finality disentitling petitioner to challenge the same in this petition. In the circumstances, there is a need to interfere with General Award Annexure-A insofar as it relates to petitioner's land.
3. In the result, this petition is allowed. General Award Annexure-A insofar as it relates to petitioner is concerned is quashed. A direction shall ensue to respondent-KIADB to consider the case of the petitioner for determination of compensation by way of an agreement under Section 29(2) of the 'KIAD' Act to be complied with as expeditiously as possible within an outer limit of 31st October 2015. It is made clear that this order is applicable only if there is any dispute to title in the immovable property acquired and if there is one, the General Award in respect of petitioner 7 W.P. Nos.45731 & 46444/17 C/w. W.P. No.42243/17 is concerned shall stand restored until the dispute is resolved."
In that view, a similar consideration is necessarily to be made in the instant petitions.
3. Hence, the General Award made in these writ petitions is set aside insofar as the petitioners are concerned and a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for determination of the compensation in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act. It is made clear that in the event of there being any dispute with regard to title, the observation as contained in the above extracted portion would apply to the instant case as well. The consideration shall be made by passing appropriate orders in terms of Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act as expeditiously as possible, within three months from the date of a copy is available to the respondents.
The petitions are accordingly disposed off.
SD/-
JUDGE.
Ksm*