Karnataka High Court
Mr Indrajit Palya Lankesh vs Karnataka Road Development on 10 April, 2024
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:14694
WP No. 7370 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 7370 OF 2024 (GM-CPC)
BETWEEN:
MR. INDRAJIT PALYA LANKESH,
S/O LATE LANKESH P.,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/AT NO. 794, 9TH MAIN,
NEAR BDA COMPLEX,
KORAMANGALA 3RD BLOCK,
BENGALURU - 560 034,
REPRESENTED BY HIS GPA HOLDER
GIRISH.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT. ANUSHA L., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
VANDANA S 1. KARNATAKA ROAD DEVELOPMENT
Location: High CORPORATION LTD.,
Court of Karnataka
2ND FLOOR, SAMPARKASOUDHA,
OPP ORIN MALL,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA - 560 010,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. THE TAHASILDAR
PM6V+2VF, VINAYAKA NAGAR,
ANEKAL, BENGALURU - 562 106.
3. SRI. S. NARAYANAPPA,
S/O LATE SANJEEVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
R/AT 31/1, KRISHNA DODDI,
KALBALU, BENGALURU - 560 083.
...RESPONDENTS
(VIDE ORDER DATED:10.04.2024,
NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:14694
WP No. 7370 of 2024
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 R/W 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER
DATED:13.12.2021 (ANNEXURE-AK IN THE OS NO. 526/2021 PASSED BY
THE HONBLE PRL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC ANEKAL AND
CONSEQUENTLY DECLARE THE SAID ORDER DATED:13.12.2021 IS
WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND NOT MAINTAINABLE, VIOLATIVE OF
SECTION 63 OF THE RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND
TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT ACT 2013 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is preferred by the defendant No.1 in
O.S.No.526/2021 on the file of the Principal Civil Judge, Junior
Division, JMFC, Anekal.
2. Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner and perused the material on record.
3. The order passed, notice to respondents is dispensed
with.
4. In additional to reiterating the various contentions
urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned
Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the suit filed by
respondent No.3-plaintiff in relation to acquisition proceedings is
expressly barred by the provision of the Section 16(3) of the Right
to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
NC: 2024:KHC:14694
Rehabilitation, Resettlement Act, 2013, which ousts the jurisdiction
of the Civil Court to entertain and adjudicate upon the matter. It is
submitted that under these circumstances, an application filed
under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC has been filed by the petitioner
which is pending for more than two years and in view of the delay
in disposal of the application the petitioner is before this Court by
way of the present petition.
5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and in the light of the
judgment of the Apex Court in High Court Bar Association
Allahabad Vs The State of U.P & Others in Criminal Appeal
No.3589/2023 dated 29.02.2023, I deem it just and appropriate to
direct the trial Court to dispose of the application filed by the
petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC as expeditiously as
possible.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GPG
