Karnataka High Court
Sri. M.V. Guruprasad vs State Of Karnataka on 12 December, 2023
Author: Krishna S Dixit
Bench: Krishna S Dixit
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45184
RP No. 330 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT
REVIEW PETITION NO. 330 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. M.V. GURUPRASAD,
S/O M B VITTAL RAO,
AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 690/K, 14TH MAIN,
J P NAGAR, II PHASE, BANGALORE 560 078.
2. SMT NANDINI M GURUPRASAD
@ NANDINI G MANKALE
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
RESIDING AT 690/K, 14TH MAIN,
J P NAGAR, II PHASE, BANGALORE 560 078.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. VEERANNA G TIGADI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
by SHARADA
VANI B REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
Location: HIGH COMMERCE AND INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT,
COURT OF VIKAS SOUDHA, BANGALORE 560 001.
KARNATAKA
2. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
III AND IV FLOORS, KHANIJA BHAVAN,
RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER.
3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KIADB,
III AND IV FLOORS, KHANIJA BHAVAN,
RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45184
RP No. 330 of 2023
4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFCER II,
KIADB,
III AND IV FLOORS, KHANIJA BHAVAN,
RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.SAVITHRAMMA, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. P V CHANDRASHEKAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2 TO R4)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114 R/W
ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO A) REVIEW THE JUDGMENT
DATED 10/02/2023 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT
PETITION NO. 61426/2016 (ANNEXURE-A) AND QUANTIFY THE
SUMS PAYABLE TO THE PETITIONERS UNDER DIRECTIONS (I) AND
(II) OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED JUDGMENT AND B) CALL FOR
RECORDS IN WRIT PETITION NO. 61426/2016 DISPOSED OFF BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT ON 10/02/2023 AND ETC.,
THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Writ Petitioners seek review of the judgment dated
10.02.2023 whereby the subject Writ Petition was
disposed off in their favour. Learned counsel appearing for
the Review Petitioners submits that what is payable to his
clients should be much more than what is now approved
by the Respondent - KIADB and therefore, accordingly the
operative portion of the said judgment needs to be
modified. He also draws attention of the Court to the two
Applications the one for condonation of delay in IA
No.1/2023 viz and the other for a direction to the
NC: 2023:KHC:45184
Respondent - KIADB to the Petitioners the amount
admittedly payable to them, regardless of the outcome of
the W.A.No.1382/2023 filed by the KIADB.
2. Learned panel Counsel appearing for the KIADB
does not have much objections for condoning the delay in
filing the Review petition and also for making the payment
of amount admittedly payable to the Petitioners in terms
of the order/Award, subject to the outcome of the Writ
Appeal. After all, what is payable is the recompense for
the land lost in acquisition. It's a constitutional obligation
under Article 300A.
In view of the above, the Application in IA No.1/2023
is allowed and delay of 129 days stands condoned.
Similarly, the Application in IA No.2/2023 is also favorued
and a direction issues to the Respondent - KIADB to pay
to the Review Petitioners the amount of compensation
admittedly payable to them, within four weeks. If delay is
brooked, the same would carry interest at the rate of 2%
NC: 2023:KHC:45184
per mensum, which may be recovered from the erring
officials personally.
In view of the above, nothing survives for
consideration in the Review Petition and accordingly the
same is disposed off, costs having been made easy.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Bsv
