SURESH D. BANKAPUR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four Writ Appeals are directed against the orders passed by learned single Judge, all dated 09.07.2012, in the Writ Petitions filed by the appellants seeking direction to the Special Land Acquisition Officer to consider their representations (Annexure-D in all the Writ Petitions) whereby they sought solatium and interest on the market value of their lands, acquired under the provisions of Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (for short the "KIAD Act"). The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petitions holding that the appellants are not entitled for the solatium and interest on the market value in view of determination of the amount of compensation by agreement as contemplated by Section 29(2) of the KIAD Act.

(2.) The prayers made in all the writ petitions filed by the appellants are identical. The only prayer in the Writ Petitions reads thus:

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset, invited our attention to the judgment of the Division Bench (K. Sreedhar Rao and V. Suri Appa Rao JJ.) dated 06.12.2012 in Totesh Kotrappa Mudgal v. State of Karnataka & another (for short "T. K. Mudgal") in W.A. No. 30951/2012 and submitted that the present appeals are squarely covered by this judgment (dated 06.12.2012) and hence, these appeals may also be disposed of in terms thereof. In support of this contention our attention was invited to the order dated 30.01.2013, passed by another Division Bench (H. Billappa and B. S. Indrakala JJ) in Bhulappa Yellappa Kembhavi v. State of Karnataka & Others in W.A. No. 30954/2012, which followed the judgment in T. K. Mudgal.