Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28530 (KAR)

SRI D K NAGANNA v. THE COMMISSIONER

RFA/321/2026 · 2026-07-15

Hanchate Sanjeevkumar

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010115212026 NC: 2026:KHC:36215 RFA No. 321 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 321 OF 2026 BETWEEN: 1. 1(a) 1(b) 1(b)(i) 1(b)(ii) SRI. D.K. NAGANNA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR'S D.N. ASWATHALAKSHMI, W/O. D.K. NAGANNA, IS ALSO NO MORE BY HER LR'S SRI. D.N. GURUDATH, S/O. D.K. NAGANNA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR'S SMT. VARALAKSHMI GURUDATH, D/O. LATE GURUDATH, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’S SMT. SREEVIDHYA W/O ANAND VENKATARAM AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS (BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.130, 5TH CROSS, ITI LAYOUT, J.P.NAGAR 1ST PHASE, BANGALORE – 560 078. 1(b)(iii) SMT. RADHA, W/O. KUMARASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010115212026 NC: 2026:KHC:36215 RFA No. 321 of 2026 NO.826, 7TH CROSS, 1ST “A” MAIN, III BLOCK, III STAGE, BSK, BANGALORE - 560 085. 1(b)(iv) SMT. SRIVALLI, W/O. SUBRAMANYA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS NO.3917, SARVANI, 12TH MAIN, II STAGE, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 078. 1(c) D.N. NAGARATHNA, D/O. LATE D.K. NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, NO.3406, 13TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS SHASTRINAGAR, K.R. ROAD, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE. DECEASED UNMARRIED 1(d) D.N. NARASIMHAMURTHY, S/O. LATE D.K. NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS, NO. 3406, 13TH MAIN, 2ND CROSS, SHASTRINAGAR, K.R. ROAD, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE. 1(e) D.N. SRIDHARAMURTHY, S/O. LATE D.K. NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, NO. 253/10, SHIVALLI NILAYA, “OUT HOUSE” 9TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS, TINAM SREEKANTAIAH ROAD, HANUMANTHANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 019. 1(f) SMT. D.N. KRISHNAVENI, - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010115212026 NC: 2026:KHC:36215 RFA No. 321 of 2026 D/O. LATE D.K. NAGANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, NO.1, “LAKSHMI” MODEL HOUSE STREET, BASAVANAGUDI, BANGALORE - 560 004. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. R HARINATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE COMMISSIONER BRUHATH BENGALURU MAHA NAGARA PALIKE, BANGALORE - 560 009. 2. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (RAILWAYS) T.V. TOWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001. …RESPONDENTS THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUITION ACT, 1894, R/W ORDER 41 RULE 1 & SEC 96 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 09.12.2025 PASSED IN LAC NO.210/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE BENGALURU AND ETC., THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010115212026 NC: 2026:KHC:36215 RFA No. 321 of 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellants has filed a memo for withdrawal of the appeal dated 01.07.2026. The memo reads as under: “MEMO OF WITHDRAWAL The appellant most respectfully states as follows: The appellant has challenged the order of the Learned Trial Court in LAC No. 210/2005, wherein, the trial Court has rejected the reference petition U/s. 18(3) of the L.A. Act., on the premise of Limitation. The counsel has filed the above Regular First Appeal on the mistaken belief of an award, though in fact, it is rejection of the order for reference. The above appeal was filed in time. The office has also raised same objection regarding maintainability of the appeal and noted CRP maintainable. The Undersigned after carefully perusing the provision of law, has convinced himself to file CRP and is ready to be filed. In view of the above, it is humbly prayed to permit the appellants to withdraw the above appeal and to file CRP in the office in the interest of justice and equity. Hence, reserving liberty to the appellants, it is humbly prayed to permit the appellants to withdraw the above appeal in the interest of justice and equity.” - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010115212026 NC: 2026:KHC:36215 RFA No. 321 of 2026 2. Accepting the said memo and submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is taken on record. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE rv List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28