Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2025 DAILYLAW 67206 (KAR)

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA v. MRS VERONICA

WA/1409/2025 · 2025-12-05

C M Poonacha

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51243-DB WA No. 1409 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT APPEAL NO. 1409 OF 2025 (KLR-LG) BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M.S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN-573 201 3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT D.C. OFFICE BUILDING HASSAN-573 201 4. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER SAKALESHPURA SUB-DIVISION SAKALESHPURA-573 134 5. THE TAHSILDAR ARKALAGUD TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 102 6. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF LAND RECORDS ARKALAGUD TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573 102 Digitally signed by PRABHAKAR SWETHA KRISHNAN Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51243-DB WA No. 1409 of 2025 7. THE DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST HASSAN DIVISION HASSAN-573 201 8. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CEN CRIME POLICE DCRB DIVISION HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 201 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI MOHAMMED JAFFAR SHAH, AGA) AND: 1. MRS VERONICA W/O VILLIYAM AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS RESIDENT OF YEDEHALLI NANJAPURA VILLAGE (Y. N. PURA) K HOSAKOTE HOBLI ARKALGUD TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT- 573 129. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. GIRISHA H M.,ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THE WRIT APPEAL AND TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P. No.22358/2023 (KLR-LG) DATED 28.03.2024 & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51243-DB WA No. 1409 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE) 1. For the reasons stated in the affidavit accompanying the application―I.A.No.1/2025, the same is allowed. The delay of 448 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 2. The appellants have filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 28.03.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.22358/2023 (KLR-LG). 3. The respondent had filed the said petition, inter alia, impugning an order dated 02.06.2023 cancelling the grant of lands granted in her favour. The said petition was allowed and the matter was remanded back to the Special Land Acquisition Officer to have the value of the standing trees in the granted land assessed at the hands of the competent authority. 4. It appears that the order proceeded on the basis that the cancellation order, which was impugned in the said petition had - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51243-DB WA No. 1409 of 2025 been passed on account of failure on the part of the writ petitioner to pay the value of the trees. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants contends that the grant in favour of the respondent has been cancelled as it was one of the grants that was considered as illegal. He contended that on inquiry, it was found that out of 979 instances of grant of lands to landless people who had lost their lands because of submergence on account of construction of the Hemavathi/Yagachi/Vatehole Reservoirs, 414 grants were found to be obtained by forged signatures. He further submits that the grant in the case of the respondent is also called into question as she could not establish the genuineness of the grant and the same was cancelled. 6. The learned Single Judge had not accepted the above contention and held that the observations in the order dated 02.06.2023 to the aforesaid are general observations. 7. After some arguments, the learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the appellants seeks liberty to file a review petition. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:51243-DB WA No. 1409 of 2025 8. The present appeal is disposed of with liberty to the appellants to file a review petition. Liberty is also reserved to the appellants to file afresh. We clarify that all contentions of the parties are reserved. 9. Pending application stands disposed of. Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KPS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5