- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39747-DB W.A. No.811/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.811/2023 (LA-BDA) BETWEEN: 1. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARAPARK WEST BENGALURU-560020 REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER. 2. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY T. CHOWDAIAH ROAD, KUMARAPARK WEST BENGALURU-560020. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. BASAVARAJA H.T. ADV.,) AND: 1. MR. P. ARJUNA S/O LATE MR. PARASURAM AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS R/AT NO.819/3, 13TH CROSS 7TH BLOCK, JAYANAGARA WEST BENGALURU-560082. 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39747-DB W.A. No.811/2023 BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAVEED S, ADV., FOR C/R1 SMT. PRAMODHINI KISHAN, AGA FOR R2) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 14.12.2022 IN W.P.NO.54343/2016 (LA-BDA) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This intra Court appeal is filed by the Bangalore Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the BDA') assailing the order dated 14.12.2022 passed in W.P.No.54343/2016 (LA-BDA). 2. Sri.Basavaraja H.T., learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the learned Single Judge has failed to take note of the fact that the land in question was vested with the BDA as the award was passed and the possession of the land was taken. It is submitted that the learned Single - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39747-DB W.A. No.811/2023 Judge, erroneously considering the earlier orders of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has come to the conclusion that the acquisition proceedings are lapsed as the scheme of the BDA in relation to J.P. Nagar 9th phase had lapsed and also on the ground that the possession and enjoyment of the land is with the respondent-land owner. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 3. Sri.Javeed S., learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 supports the impugned order of the learned Single Judge and submits that the learned Single Judge, taking note of the material placed before him has recorded a clear finding that the possession of the land in question was not taken by the BDA and the BDA has failed to implement the J.P.Nagar 9th Stage scheme and the said finding does not call for any interference. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced on both sides. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39747-DB W.A. No.811/2023 5. The undisputed facts are that the preliminary notification under Section 17 of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on 17.11.1988 and thereafter final notification was issued on 22.07.1991. The land bearing Sy.No.31/1C of Doddakallasandra Village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk measuring 2 acres 8 guntas was acquired pursuant to the aforesaid notifications for the formation of "Jayaprakash Narayan Nagar 9th Stage". The learned Single Judge, considering the case of V.VENKATESH AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS1 recorded a finding that the scheme of the BDA in relation to J.P.Nagar 9th Stage layout had lapsed and accordingly quashed the acquisition proceedings. It is to be noticed that the decision of the learned Single Judge in the case of V.VENKATESH, referred supra has been challenged in W.A.Nos.187-188/2017 and W.A.Nos.698- 701/2018 and the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.04.2019 dismissed the appeals. The BDA took up the same before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. Nos.29140- 1 W.P.Nos.1377/16 & 1382/16 dt.21.4.16 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39747-DB W.A. No.811/2023 145/2019 and the said special leave petition came to be dismissed vide order dated 12.10.2022. Considering the aforesaid decision, the learned Single Judge has recorded a finding that the BDA has failed to implement the J.P.Nagar 9th Stage scheme and more particularly, recorded a finding that the BDA has failed to take possession of the land in question and the said finding of the learned Single Judge is based on the appreciation of the material placed before him. We do not find any error or perversity in such finding. 6. The appellant-BDA has placed certain documents along with an application filed under Order XLI Rule 27(1)(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Considering the same also, we are of the view that the appellant-BDA has failed to establish that they have taken possession of the land in question layout is formed and implemented the scheme substantially. We do not find any error or perversity in the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge calling for interference in this appeal. 7. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to pass the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:39747-DB W.A. No.811/2023 ORDER The appeal is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly rejected. Pending application, if any is disposed of. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV