Karnataka High Court
Smt Eramma vs The State Of Karnataka on 20 November, 2024
Author: S.G.Pandit
Bench: S.G.Pandit
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:47072-DB
WA No. 1650 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1650 OF 2023 (LA-KIADB)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. ERAMMA
W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS
2. MUNISHAMI
S/O LATE SAMPAIAH
AGED ABOUT 88 YEARS
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
ANJANAPPA VILLAGE
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK
PIN-560 103
Digitally signed by
SHAKAMBARI ...APPELLANTS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF (BY SRI. B. RAMESH, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND
INDUSTRIES, VIKASA SOUDHA
BENGALURU-560 001
REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECREARY
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:47072-DB
WA No. 1650 of 2023
EAST WING, KHANIJA BHAWAN
BENGALURU-560 001
REP. BY ITS CEO
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER
KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA
DEVELOPMENT BOARD (BMICP)
1ST FLOOR, MARASHI ARAVIND BHAVAN
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001
4. NANDI INFRASTRUCTURE CORRIDOR
ENTERPRISES LTD.,
NO.1, MIDFORD GARDEN ROAD
CRIAG PARK LAYOUT
ASHOK NAGAR
BENGALURU-560 001
REP. BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. P.V. CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3;
SRI. NITIN PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE
RECORDS AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 08.11.2023
PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.16056/2023 BY THE LEARNED
SINGLE JUDGE AND ALLOW THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY
APPELLANTS AS PRAYED FOR AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:47072-DB
WA No. 1650 of 2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)
Heard the learned counsel Sri B.Ramesh for the
appellant, Learned counsel Sri P.V.Chandrashekar, for
respondent Nos.2 and 3, learned counsel Sri Nitin Prasad, for
respondent no.1 and perused the writ appeal papers.
2. Learned counsel Sri B.Ramesh for the appellant
would submit that the petitioners were before the learned
Single Judge challenging the preliminary notification issued
under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Area
Development Act, 1966 (for short `the Act') on the ground that
proceedings has lapsed since no notification under Section
28(4) is issued till this date.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents
submits that, writ petition by the petitioners would not be
maintainable since the petitioners have parted with the
property to one Sri K. Siva Rao under Sale Deed dated
23.7.2005 and 17.06.2006. It is submitted that as the
appellants have lost right, title and interest over the land in
question more than 20 years ago, the petitioners-appellants
NC: 2024:KHC:47072-DB
have no locus to challenge the acquisition. Learned Single
Judge has come to the conclusion that, person who has sold the
land under acquisition would have no subsisting interest and
therefore, no locus standi lies to maintain the writ petition.
4. We do not find any error in arriving at the above
conclusion by the learned Single Judge as appellants-petitioners
have sold the property to one K.Shiva Rao under registered
sale deeds dated 23.7.2005 and 17.06.2006. Having parted
with the property, the petitioners have no right, title or interest
over the land in question.
5. No ground is made out to interfere with the learned
Single Judge order.
6. With the above, the Writ Appeal stands rejected.
Sd/-
(S.G.PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR)
JUDGE
SK
