- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31430 WP No. 3754 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 3754 OF 2026 (LA-KIADB) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. N. RAMESH S/O LATE M.NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT GEDDALAPURA VILLAGE, JADEGANAHALLI HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562114. 2. SRI. R.NARAYANASWAMY, S/O. M.RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT IMMADIHALLI VILLAGE AND POST, K.R.PURAM HOBLI, BENGALURU EAST TALUK, BENGALURU-560066 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. SHIVASHANKAR K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 REP. BY THE SECRETARY 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (KIADB) PALACE ROAD, ADJACENT TO SCOUTS AND GUIDES BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001. Digitally signed by HEMALATHA J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31430 WP No. 3754 of 2026 3. KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (KIADB) OFF/AT NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR, R.P.BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REPRESENTED BY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER 4. MANGALORE RETAINARY AND PETROCHEMICALS LTD.(MRPL), PLOT A1 RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL AREA, RAJAJINAGAR, CHORD ROAD, OPPOSITE KSSIDC.NO OFFICE, RAJAJINAGAR INDUSTRIAL TOWN, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU KARNATAKA-560010 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. POOJA M. KOORSE, HIGH COURT GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1; SMT. NETRA S. BALIKAI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. DILDAR SHIRALLI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3; VIDE ORDER DATED 24.06.2026, NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.4 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATIONS DATED 19.04.2025 AND 24.07.2024 GIVEN BY THE PETITIONERS PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT AND TO RELEASE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT IN THEIR FAVOUR AS PER THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN RESPECT OF THEIR PROPERTIES AS PER THE ANNEXURE-J AND J1. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. NATARAJ ORAL ORDER The petitioners have sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to consider the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31430 WP No. 3754 of 2026 representations dated 19.04.2025 and 24.07.2024 and to release the compensation in their favour, as per the order passed by this Court in W.P. No.23012/2023. 2. (i) The petitioners contend that they are the owners of old Sy. No.158, New Sy. No.158/2 and 158/1 respectively measuring 30 guntas situate at Doddadasarahalli, Jadigenahalli Hobli, Hosakote Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District, having purchased the same in terms of sale deeds dated 23.10.2006 and 19.09.2011 respectively. They contend that a suit in O.S. No.1496/2017, subsequently re-numbered as O.S.No.687/2022 was filed by Smt. Mariyamma and others for partition and separate possession of their share in the aforesaid property. The petitioners were arrayed as defendant Nos.2 and 3 in the said suit and their vendor was arrayed as defendant No.1. (ii) They contend that despite giving sufficient opportunities, Smt. Mariyamma and others did not lead evidence and consequently, the suit was dismissed for non- prosecution on 30.06.2023. The petitioners further contend that an award was passed on 31.12.2022 and a notice of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31430 WP No. 3754 of 2026 award was issued to them on 05.04.2023. The plaintiffs in O.S. No.687/2022 had filed objections before the respondent No.2 requesting that the compensation should not be released in favour of any person until the disposal of O.S. No.687/2022. The petitioners contend that after the dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.687/2022, they approached this Court in W.P.No.23012/2023 seeking a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to disburse the compensation amount in their favour, which was allowed. However, the respondents have not considered the said representations. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners are before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that there is no impediment for respondent Nos.2 and 3 to release the compensation, in view of the dismissal of O.S. No.687/2022 and therefore, prays for a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the representations and direct them to release the compensation. 4. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that after dismissal of O.S. No.687/2022, a case in Misc.No.3/2023 is filed for restoration of the suit. She - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:31430 WP No. 3754 of 2026 therefore contends that unless the suit is finally decided, the respondent Nos.2 and 3 cannot be directed to release the compensation. 5. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3. 6. Though the suit filed by Smt. Mariyamma and others was dismissed for non-prosecution, Misc. No.3/2023 is filed seeking restoration of the suit. Consequently, respondent Nos.2 and 3 cannot release the compensation in favour of the petitioners unless Misc. No.3/2023 is finally decided. Therefore, no direction can be issued to the respondents to consider the representations filed by the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is open for the petitioners to approach the respondent Nos.2 and 3 after the final adjudication of Misc.No.3/2023. Sd/- (R. NATARAJ) JUDGE HJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16