IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION Nos.46478 – 46479/2016 & 16353 – 16358/2018 (LA – KIADB) BETWEEN:
1. SMT.SHARADAMMA W/O LATE K.MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 2. SRI K MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE KARE MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS 3. SRI RAJAPPA S/O LATE K.M.MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 4. SMT.GOWRAMMA D/O LATE K.MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS 5. SRI MUNIRAMAIAH S/O K.MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 6. SRI CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA S/O K.MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 7. SRI MUNILAKSHMAMMA S/O K.MARAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 8. SRI M.RAVI S/O K.MARAPPA, AND:
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT VAJARAHALLI VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU. ... PETITIONERS [BY SRI UDAYA KUMAR G., ADV.] 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE VIKASA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560001, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560002 BY ITS EXECUTIVE MEMBER.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560002 4. SRI MUNIYAPPA S/O LATE JUNJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS 5. SMT.PUTTAMMA W/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS 6. SRI MUNIKRISHNA S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 7. SRI SHASIKUMAR S/O MUNIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS RESPONDE No.4 TO 7 ARE R/AT VAJARAHALLI VILLAGE, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560058. …RESPONDENTS [BY SRI E.J.ESHWARAPPA, AGA FOR R-1;
SRI P.V.CHANDRASHEKHAR, ADV. FOR R-2 & R-3; SRI M.SHIVARAJA, ADV. FOR R-4, R-5 & R-7.] THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.02.2015 AND NOTICE DATED 10.08.2016 OF PETITIONERS i.e., ANNEXURE-A & H AND FURTHER DIRECTING HIM NOT TO DISBURSE THE PACKAGED AWARDED AMOUNT IN FAVOUR OF R-4 TO 7.
THESE PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R In these writ petitions, the petitioners have sought for issue of a writ of mandamus by directing respondent No.3 to consider the notice as per Annexure – A dated 10.08.2016 and representation as per Annexure – H dated 20.02.2015 and further directing respondent No.3 not to disburse the packaged awarded amount in favour of respondent Nos.4 to 7 and further to deposit the packaged awarded amount in Civil Court in O.S.No.1838/2015 pending on the file of the II Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Bangalore Rural District between the petitioner and defendant Nos.4 to 7.
2. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has filed a reply/statement of objections and submitted that the reliefs claimed in these writ petitions do not survive for consideration in view of the reference case in LAC No.114/2016 made to the Civil Court under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. It is submitted that after the receipt of the packaged amount, the parties have agreed to receive the same by accepting the same without seeking any enhancement or to approach the Court. Considering the inter-se dispute regarding the apportionment of the compensation amount, the matter was referred to the Civil Court after passing an award by the Land Acquisition Officer on 25.04.2016 for apportionment and adjudication/determination of rights, title and interest of the rival claimant by depositing Rs.39,96,474/- after deducting TDS and the said amount is said to have been deposited before the Hon’ble Principal City Civil Judge, Bangalore on 07.11.2016. Copy of the said document is placed on record at Annexure – R1.
3. In view of the aforesaid, the reliefs claimed in these writ petitions do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, these writ petitions stand dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE PMR