Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Lakshmaiah And Others vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Revenue And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|12 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR WRIT APPEAL NOS.8222-8224 OF 2012 (LA-RES) BETWEEN:
1. SRI LAKSHMAIAH SON OF LATE DODDATHAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS.
2. SRI SEETHARAMAIAH SON OF LATE DODDATHAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS.
3. SRI NARASIMHAIAH SON OF LATE DODDATHAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.
4. SRI MUNINANJAPPA SON OF LATE MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS.
5. SMT. RATHANAMMA WIFE OF NARASHIMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.
6. SRI KRISHNAPPA SON OF LATE MUNISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT HOSAHALLI VILLAGE GANIGARA PALYA, THALAGATTAPURA POST, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 062.
...APPELLANTS (BY SRI Y.R. SADASIVA REDDY, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE EX-SERVICEMAN HOUSE BUILDING CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED, NO.652/B, 2ND FLOOR, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD, 2ND STAGE, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.
3. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER VISHWESHWARAIAH TOWER, 2ND FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001.
4. REGISTRAR FOR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, NO.1, ALIASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052.
5. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR FOR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES NO.1, ALIASKAR ROAD, BENGALURU-560 052.
6. THE COMMISSIONER B.D.A., CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU-560 020.
7. TOWN PLANNING MEMBER B.D.A., CHOWDAIAH ROAD, BENGALURU-560 020.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI LAKSHMINARAYANA, AGA FOR R1, R3 TO R5; SRI S.S. NAGANAND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR M/S. LAWYERS INC., FOR C/R2;
SRI I.G. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R6 & R7) THESE WRIT APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 10.10.2012 IN WRIT PETITION NOS.25169-25177 OF 2010 (LA-RES) PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE BY ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEALS, CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE WRIT PETITIONS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
***** THESE WRIT APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, RAVI MALIMATH J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 10.10.2012, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition Nos.25169-25177 of 2010, dismissing the writ petitions, the writ petitioners have filed these appeals.
2. On considering the merit of the writ petitions, the learned Single Judge held that the petitioners themselves have admitted the earlier proceedings initiated by them. In fact, the findings recorded in the earlier petition was also extracted by the learned Single Judge at para – 9 which reads as follows:
“Secondly, on the ground that the entire proceedings for initiation of acquisition of the land in question is void in law in view of the fact that there was an agreement dated 25.05.1985 entered into between the petitioners and the contractor M/s. Bangalore Engineering Contractors, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure-E, elaborating the second submission of Sri Rao pointed out that the agreement entered into between the petitioner and M/s.Bangalore Engineering Contractors shows that the entire acquisition proceedings were initiated at the instance of the said contractor who had acted at the instance of the 4th respondent society. In support of the second submission Shri. Rao relies upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of HMT House Building Cooperative Society vs. Syed Khader, ILR 1995 Kar. 1962.”
3. Under these facts and circumstances, we do not find any ground to consider the plea of the petitioners. Since the entire plea of the petitioners have already been considered in the earlier found of litigation, it is needless to state that the petitioners cannot be permitted to reagitate the same, time and again, when the earlier round of litigation is concluded. Under these circumstances, the learned Single Judge was justified in passing the impugned order herein. Hence, the appeals are dismissed.
Pending I.A.s stands rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE JJ/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Lakshmaiah And Others vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Revenue And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
12 November, 2019
Judges
  • Hemant Chandangoudar
  • Ravi Malimath