Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri Ravindranath Bajpe, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore, challenging an order dated 07.01.2013 passed by the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge at Mangalore on I.A. III in LAC No. 14/2008. The petitioner claimed that his father, Konchappa Devadiga, had acquired immovable property measuring 1 acre 72 cents and 0.12 cents in Sy.No.8/1A, and upon his death, the revenue records recorded the name of the petitioner's mother, Smt. Sharada Bai, the first respondent, as the seniormost member of the family. The petitioner contended that his mother had no right, title, or interest over the properties and that the acquisition proceedings commenced by the State for the public purpose of Bajpe Airport were conducted in the name of the first respondent without notice to him. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order and allow his application. The court, after hearing the petitioner's counsel, observed that the petitioner's mother is the recorded owner and the seniormost member of the family, and the petitioner's rights, if any, are only derivative through his mother. The court held that the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the acquisition proceedings as he is not the owner and no notice was required to be issued to him. The writ petition was dismissed as devoid of merits.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Locus Standi - Right to Notice - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 4(1) - Petitioner claimed to be son of deceased owner and sought to quash acquisition proceedings for Bajpe Airport on ground that his mother, recorded as owner, had no right and that no notice was issued to him - Court held that petitioner has no locus standi as mother is the recorded owner and heir, and petitioner's rights, if any, are derivative and not independent - Petition dismissed (Para 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, claiming as son of the deceased owner, has locus standi to challenge land acquisition proceedings when the mother is recorded as the owner and no notice was issued to him.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits.
Law Points
- Locus standi
- Land acquisition
- Notice under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Right to be heard
- Succession rights
Case Details
2013 LawText (KAR) (02) 8
Writ Petition No. 4934 of 2013 (LA-RES)
Sri. B S Sachin for M/s. Dharmashree A/S
Smt. Sharada Bai, The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Mangalore
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order in land acquisition proceedings.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to quash the impugned order dated 07.01.2013 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangalore on I.A. III in LAC No. 14/2008 and to allow the said application.
Filing Reason
Petitioner claimed that his mother, the first respondent, had no right over the property acquired for Bajpe Airport and that no notice was issued to him.
Previous Decisions
The Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge at Mangalore passed an order on 07.01.2013 on I.A. III in LAC No. 14/2008, which is the subject of challenge.
Issues
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to challenge the land acquisition proceedings when his mother is the recorded owner?
Whether the petitioner was entitled to notice under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that his mother has no right, title, or interest over the property and that acquisition proceedings were conducted without notice to him.
Petitioner contended that his father acquired the property and upon his death, the revenue records erroneously recorded the mother's name.
Ratio Decidendi
A person who is not the owner of the land and has only derivative rights through the recorded owner has no locus standi to challenge land acquisition proceedings. Notice under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is not required to be issued to such a person.
Judgment Excerpts
Petitioner claims that his father by name Konchappa Devadiga acquired immovable property measuring 1 acre 72 cents and 0.12 cents in sy.No.8/1A and on his death the revenue registers recorded the name of the petitioner’s mother none other than the widow-1st respondent, herein, being the seniormost member in the petitioner’s family.
According to the petitioner, his mother has no right, title and interest over the immovable properties and the acquisition proceedings commenced by the State to acquire the said property for a public purpose to wit for Bajpe Airport, in the name of the 1st respondent-mother, without notice issued to the petitioner, though petitioner’s father had...
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore, challenging an order dated 07.01.2013 passed by the Court of II Additional Senior Civil Judge at Mangalore on I.A. III in LAC No. 14/2008. The petition was heard on 18.02.2013 and dismissed.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4(1)
