Karnataka High Court
Smt Muniyamma vs State Of Karnataka on 2 March, 2023
Bench: Alok Aradhe, Vijaykumar A Patil
-1-
WA No.1329 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A PATIL
WRIT APPEAL NO.1329 OF 2021 (LA-BDA)
BETWEEN:
SMT. MUNIYAMMA
SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS.
1. RAMAKRISHNAPPA
Digitally SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS.
signed by
RUPA V 1(a) R. CHANDRU
Location: High S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA
Court of
Karnataka AGED 45 YEARS.
1(b) SMT. KALAVATHI
W/O TULSI PRASAD
D/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAPA
AGED 40 YEARS.
1(c) RAJESH
S/O LATE RAMAKRISHNAPPA
AGED 36 YEARS.
APPELLANT NO.1(a) TO (c) ARE
R/AT NO.11, K.P.A. BLOCK
2ND CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT
BENGLAURU-560040.
2. NARAYANAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S.
2(a) SMT. LAKSHMAMMA
W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED 59 YEARS.
-2-
WA No.1329 of 2021
2(b) SMT. N. NALINI
D/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED 41 YEARS.
2(c) SRI. VENKATESH B N
S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED 36 YEARS.
2(d) SMT. HEMAVATHI
D/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED 32 YEARS.
APPELLANTS NO.2(a) TO 2(d) ARE
R/AT NO.47, K.P.A. BLOCK
1ST CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT
BENGLAURU-560040.
3. HANUMANTHAPPA
S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH
AGED 55 YEARS
KPA BLOCK, DOOR NO.10
2ND CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT
BENGLAURU-560040.
4. VENKATA CHALLAPATHI
S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH
AGED 53 YEARS
KPA BLOCK, DOOR NO.46, 1ST CROSS
CHANDRA LAYOUT, BENGLAURU-560 040.
5. SRINIVAS
S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH
AGED 51 YEARS
KPA BLOCK, DOOR NO.9
2ND CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT
BENGLAURU-560040.
6. DEVARAJ
S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH
AGED 49 YEARS
KPA BLOCK, DOOR NO.3
2ND CROSS, CHANDRA LAYOUT
BENGALURU-560040.
-3-
WA No.1329 of 2021
7. GOPAL
S/O LATE MUNIRAMAIAH
AGED 49 YEARS
KPA BLOCK, DOOR NO.48, 1ST CROSS
CHANDRA LAYOUT
BENGALURU-560040.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ASHOK HARANAHALLI, SR. COUNSEL FOR
SRI. MANMOHAN P N, ADV.,)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
VIKAS SOUDHA, BENGLAURU-560 001.
2. THE COMMISSIONER
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SANKY ROAD, BENGALURU-560020.
3. THE SECRETARY
BENGALURU DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SANKY ROAD, BENGALURU-560020.
4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SANKEY ROAD, BENGLAURU-560020.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B. RAJENDRA PRASAD, HCGP FOR R1
SRI. UNNIKRISHNAN M, ADV., FOR R2-R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED
19.09.2019 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION NO 4094-95/2017 AND
4473-76/2017 AND THE ORDER DATED 03.03.2020 PASSED IN
REVIEW PETITION NO.551/2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT
PETITIONS.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
WA No.1329 of 2021
JUDGMENT
This intra Court appeal arises from an order dated
19.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge by
which the writ petitions preferred by the appellants has
been dismissed. The appellants, in addition, have also
questioned the order dated 03.03.2020 passed by the
learned Single Judge by which the review petition filed
by them has been rejected.
2. Facts giving rise to filing of this appeal briefly
stated are that the appellants are the owners of land
bearing Sy.No.338/2 measuring 2 acres, 334/2
measuring 1 acre, 349/2 measuring 9 guntas, 352/2
measuring 17 guntas situated at Kempapura Agrahara
Village, Kasaba, Bengaluru North Taluk.
3. Out of the aforesaid land, the Bangalore
Development Authority was in need of the land
measuring 17 1/2 guntas for formation of Chandra
WA No.1329 of 2021
layout. Therefore, a preliminary notification dated
30.07.1977 was issued and thereafter, a final
notification was issued on 10.05.1978 and the awards
were passed on 27.12.1980 and 25.08.1986.
4. The appellants filed writ petitions namely
W.P.Nos.4517 and 37936/2015 in which the validity of
the preliminary as well as final notification was
challenged and the relief was sought. The proceeding
initiated for quashing of land was lapsed under Section
25 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976.
The learned Single Judge, by an order dated
07.09.2015, dismissed the writ petitions and upheld the
validity of the land acquisition proceeding.
5. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed writ
appeals namely W.A.Nos.3575-76/2015 which was
disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court by an
order dated 08.10.2015 reserving liberty to the
WA No.1329 of 2021
appellants to submit a fresh representation within a
fortnight. Thereafter, an order dated 28.12.2016 was
passed under Section 5(1) of the Karnataka Public
Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act,
1974. The appellants challenged the validity of the
aforesaid order in writ petitions namely W.P.Nos.4094-
4095/2017 and 4473-76/2017. The appellants, in
addition, sought quashment of preliminary as well as
final notification. The learned Single Judge, by an
order dated 19.09.2019 inter alia held that the writ
petitions preferred by the appellants were barred by the
principles of res judicata. Accordingly, the same was
dismissed. Being aggrieved, the appellants filed a
review petition which was also dismissed by the learned
Single Judge by an order dated 03.03.2020. In the
aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been
filed.
WA No.1329 of 2021
6. Learned Senior counsel for the appellants
submitted that the representation submitted by the
appellants has not been decided and the possession of
the land measuring 17 1/2 guntas has not been taken
from the appellants.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondent has supported the order passed by the
learned Single Judge.
8. We have considered the submissions made on
both sides and have perused the record. Sofar as the
reliefs claimed by the appellants in relation to the
preliminary as well as final notification are concerned,
admittedly, the appellants had challenged the same in
writ petitions namely W.P.Nos.4517 and 37936/2015
which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of this
Court by an order dated 07.09.2015. The aforesaid
order has been upheld by a Division Bench of this Court
in W.A.Nos.3575-76/2015 and only a liberty was
WA No.1329 of 2021
granted to the appellants to submit a representation.
The challenge to the order of eviction passed under the
provisions of the Karnataka Public Premises (Eviction of
Unauthorised Occupants) Act has been made on the
ground that the proceeding initiated for acquisition of
land has been lapsed. The aforesaid ground is no
longer available to the appellants to be urged in the
subsequent writ petitions as the same is barred by the
principles of res judicata.
For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find
any ground to differ with the view taken by the learned
Single Judge.
In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby
dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
