M. LAKSHMI NARAYANA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 03. 01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.55454/2018, the present appeal is filed.

(3.) The appeal revolves around a very limited point. The submission of the petitioners before the learned Single Judge in support of the prayer was that the possession of the land of the subject property was not taken by them. Learned Single Judge in paragraph 4 of the impugned order was pleased to refer the relevant provision, namely, Sec. 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and the compliance of twin conditions by the petitioners i.e., that the owner is not paid compensation and possession of the property is not taken, must be established. In the present case, the petitioners do not even dispute the compensation is received as recorded in the endorsement dtd. 27/6/2013. Insofar as second condition is concerned, learned Single Judge observed that it would remain beyond dispute that the petitioners predecessor-in- title at an undisputed point in time, has acknowledged that the subject properties are lost in acquisition, and with this specific stand, it would not be open to the petitioners to contend that the possession has not been taken.