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

High Court of Karnataka Adjudicates Multiple Writ Petitions Challenging Land Acquisition for BDA Layout. The petitions sought quashing of preliminary notification dated 21.5.2008 and final notification dated 18.2.2010 under the Karnataka BDA Act, 1976 regarding Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout.

High Court: Karnataka High Court Bench: BENGALURU
Admin
2026-10-30 22:33:39
  • 94
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

KAHC010305812010_1

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (KAR) (07) 52

W.P.No.32186/2010 & connected matters

2014-07-11

Anand Byrareddy

Udaykumar H.B., D. Nagaraj, Jayakumar S Patil, A. Lokanath

Sri. R. Shankaran & Others

State of Karnataka, Bangalore Development Authority

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging land acquisition proceedings.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought quashing of preliminary notification dated 21.5.2008 and final notification dated 18.2.2010 issued for the formation of Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout by Bangalore Development Authority.

Filing Reason

Acquisition of lands belonging to petitioners for the layout.

Acts & Sections

  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4(1)
  • Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976: Sections 17(1), 17(3), 19(1)
  • Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Tags :
land acquisition preliminary notification final notification BDA Nadaprabhu Kempegowda Layout writ petition

Pay once for this file or subscribe for unlimited downloads

Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence to Life Imprisonment for Mentally Ill Accused in Rape and Murder Case — Non-Compliance with Section 235(2) CrPC and Supervening Mental Illness Considered 2026-11-01 19:49:15
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds CAT Order Reinstating Suspended Police Officer Due to Non-Review Under Rule 3(8) of All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969. Continued suspension beyond 90 days without mandatory review renders suspension ille... 2026-11-01 19:49:09
Categories
Popular Tags
writ petition murder natural justice acquittal compensation burden of proof Land Acquisition limitation Jurisdiction Article 226
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...

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Upholds Developer's Challenge to Arbitration Award — ...

High Court Quashes School Tribunal's Order on Employee Reinstatement Due to Procedural Irr...

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction and Death Sentence in POCSO Case Due to Credible Testimon...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Against High Court's Reversal of Trial Court's Decree on Wi...

Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Accused in IPC Sections 376, 420, 493, 494, and 495 Case...

Supreme Court Restores Appellate Tribunal's Order on Tariff Determination Due to Breach of...

Supreme Court Upholds Appellant's Challenge to High Court Orders in Civil Appeal — Legal...

Lost Your Password?