B N THARAKUMARI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and in possession of property bearing Sy.No.1 situated at Benniganahalli, Bangalore North Taluk (now Bangalore East). The petitioner contends that her grandmother Smt.Yallamma, wife of Muniswamy acquired the property by way of Streedana and therefore Smt.Yallamma, was entitled to deal with the property at her wish. It is submitted that out of 1 acre 8 guntas in Sy.No.1, an extent of 10 guntas was acquired by the Railway Department for laying Selam Railway line. A copy of final notification dated 10.05.1965 is produced to substantiate this contention. However, it is submitted by the petitioner that in the Revenue records it has been wrongly mentioned that 28 guntas are acquired by Railway Department. The Revenue records therefore show that 10 guntas remained in the possession of Smt.Yallamma, after 28 guntas were acquired by Railways. Even in the judgment of the Reference Court in LAC No.298/1971, it is shown that 28 guntas in Sy.No.1, belonging to Smt.Yallamma is notified and acquired by Railways and as a result, compensation at Rs.4/- per square yard for 28 guntas of land, along with solatium at 15% and 5% interest on the excess compensation was awarded from the date of taking possession of the land.

(2.) It is contended by the petitioner that the petitioner's mother had pre-deceased Smt.Yallamma and after the death of Smt.Yallamma, the petitioner being the granddaughter, succeeded to the properties of Smt.Yallamma. However, the names of the two brothers of the petitioner having been entered in the Revenue records pertaining to Sy.No.1, the petitioner filed O.S.No.4038/1987 before the City Civil Court, Bengaluru. During the pendency of the suit, one of the brothers Sri Shailendra Kumar passed away on 05.06.1990, issueless. The suit was decreed on the basis of a compromise decree entered into between the petitioner and her brother Sri Champaka Kumar. It is contended that as per the compromise decree, the entire extent of 10 guntas in Sy.No.1, fell to the share of the petitioner herein. Nevertheless, the Revenue records to the extent of 10 guntas in Sy.No.1 stand in the name of the petitioner and B.N.Champaka Kumar, the brother.

(3.) The second respondent-KIADB notified lands including Sy.No.1 of Benniganahalli, for the purpose of Metro Rail, in favour of Bangalore Metropolitan Rail Corporation Limited. It is contended by the petitioner that no notice was issued to the petitioner as required under Section 28(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'KIAD Act' for short). It is further contended that immediately after coming to know about the notification, the husband of the petitioner enquired in the office of the KIADB and it was only then that a notice dated 23.02.2018, under Section 28(2) of the KIAD Act was issued by KIADB.