Trending :
Lawtext
Search
Login / Register
Sign In
HomeJudgement
Scroll Down To Discover
High Court

High Court of Karnataka Hears Batch of Writ Petitions Challenging Land Acquisition by Bangalore Development Authority for Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout. Petitioners Sought Quashing of Preliminary and Final Notifications Issued Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-09-14 22:24:49
  • 94
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010333742010_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (KAR) (07) 12

W.P. No. 32186 of 2010 c/w batch

2014-07-11

Justice Anand Byrareddy

Udaykumar H.B., D.L. Jagadeesh, A. Nagarajappa, G. Krishna Murthy, M/s. Agnihotri Associates, D. Nagaraj, Jayakumar S Patil

Sri. R. Shankaran and Others

State of Karnataka and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to land acquisition proceedings for formation of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout by Bangalore Development Authority

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of preliminary notification dated 21.5.2008 and final notification dated 18.2.2010 issued for acquisition of their lands

Filing Reason

Lands were notified for acquisition under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 for the Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout, and petitioners challenged the validity of notifications

Acts & Sections

  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4(1)
  • Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976: Section 17(1), 17(3), 19(1)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
land acquisition preliminary notification final notification BDA Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout writ petition quashing

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Quashes SSRD Order in Land Revenue Revision Case — Upholds Validity of Registered Sale Deed and Entry No.3298. Petitioner's Title Based on Registered Sale Deed Cannot Be Disturbed by Suo-Motu Revision After 11 Years Without Notic... 2026-09-16 20:05:12
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows State Appeal in Part in Kerala Private Forest Vesting and Tree Preservation Matter. Court Holds Notification Under Section 5 of Kerala Preservation of Trees Act, 1986 Valid but Directs Modification to Permit Felling of Non-Protec... 2026-09-16 20:04:56
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition Natural Justice acquittal murder compensation burden of proof limitation Article 226 land acquisition benefit of doubt
Follow Us

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Acquiring Body in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases,...

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Upho...

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Concurrent Findings in Suit for Spec...

Bombay High Court Dismisses MBBS Student's Writ Petition Seeking Fourth Attempt in Anatomy...

High Court of Bombay Hears Writ Petitions Challenging Tenancy Orders Under Bombay Tenancy ...

Supreme Court Acquits Appellant in Prevention of Corruption Act Case Due to Absence of Pec...

Supreme Court Modifies High Court Order Appointing Different Arbitrator Under Section 11 o...

Supreme Court Upholds Scrutiny Committee Invalidation of Scheduled Tribe Caste Claim but P...

Supreme Court Allows Homebuyers' Appeal and Waives Time Extension Charges Imposed by Devel...

Supreme Court Dismisses Insurer's and Claimant's Appeals in Motor Accident Death Compensat...

Lost Your Password?