Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17247 (KAR)

MR. RAMACHANDRA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

WP/1133/2016 · 2026-02-17

S Sunil Dutt Yadav

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9651 WP No. 1133 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV WRIT PETITION NO. 1133 OF 2016 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: MR. RAMACHANDRA S/O. BUSSAPPA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/AT NO.12, 1ST CROSS, YELLAMMA TEMPLE ROAD, AMRUTALLI, BENGALURU-560 092. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. JANARDHANA G., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560 001. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, BENGALURU. 3. TALACAUVERY HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., 12/3A, NANDAGOKULA, 1ST FLOOR, YAMUNABAI ROAD, Digitally signed by VIJAYA P Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9651 WP No. 1133 of 2016 MADAVANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT, V.V. TOWERS, PODIUM BLOCK, III FLOOR, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560 001. 5. SRI. P. ASHOK RAJU S/O LATE P.S.N.RAJU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, NO.B-510, PATEL CALLISTO APARTMENTS, TALACAUVERY LAYOUT, AMRUTHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 092. 6. SRI. D.T. SHIVAPRASAD S/O SRI. D.S.THIPPESWAMY, 7TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN, BINNY LAYOUT, ATTIGUPPE, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISHA A.S., AGA FOR R1, 2 AND 4; SRI. SANGAMESH R.B., ADVOCATE FOR R5 AND 6; SRI. B.M. HALASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. SHIVARUDRAPPA E., ADVOCATE FOR PROPOSED RESPONDENTS ON I.A.2/2025) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.12.1987 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS UNDER SECTION 4(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894 VIDE ANNEXURE-C IN NO.LAQ(1) SR:25/86-87, AS LAPSED AND ETC., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9651 WP No. 1133 of 2016 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV ORAL ORDER The present petition has been filed seeking for a declaration that the notification dated 16.12.1987 issued by the respondents under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') has lapsed. Petitioner has also sought for a declaration that the notification dated 09.01.1989 passed under Section 6(1) of the Act has lapsed. 2. After hearing the matter for sometime, Sri. Janardhana G., learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would not insists on the prayer as sought for as referred above. It is submitted that the petitioner would limit his legal grievance insofar as compensation is concerned. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9651 WP No. 1133 of 2016 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 - Society who is the beneficiary, submits that the amount to enable passing of award has been remitted to the treasury and places reliance on Annexure-G which is an endorsement dated 10.09.2015. 4. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the proceedings have culminated in passing of award. 5. In light of stand of the petitioner, question of adjudication insofar as the contentions relating to relief of lapse does not arise. However, right of the petitioner to claim the amount of compensation as has been awarded would be kept open and it is open for the petitioner to claim the same as per procedure. Insofar the assertion that copy of award has not been furnished, learned AGA submits that within two weeks from receipt of certified copy of the order, the copy of award would be communicated to the petitioner or his counsel. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:9651 WP No. 1133 of 2016 6. In light of the challenge to the acquisition having come to an end by virtue of stand of the petitioner as recorded, needless to state, the possession of the allottees would not be disturbed at the instance of the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. 8. In light of the observation made with regard to the possession of allottees, the question of passing orders on I.A.No.2/2025 does not arise and is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (S SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE MCR