Karnataka High Court
WA/1287/2024 of KAVERI CERAMIC WORLD Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA on 10 July 2026
NC: 2026:KHC:35101-DB WA No. 1287 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT APPEAL NO. 1287 OF 2024 (LA-RES) BETWEEN: KAVERI CERAMIC WORLD, REPRESENTED BY ITS
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
WRIT APPEAL NO. 1287 OF 2024 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
KAVERI CERAMIC WORLD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER,
MR. NILESH O JAIN,
NO.731, 13TH CROSS,
36TH CROSS, 7TH BLOCK,
JAYANAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 082.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.S. SRIRAJ GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, VIKASA SOUDHA,
2.
BANGALORE METRO RAIL
CORPORATION LIMITED,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR,
BMTC COMPLEX, 3RD FLOOR,
K.H. ROAD, SHANTINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 027.
Digitally
signed by
REKHA R
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
HC-KAR
3.
BANGALORE METRO RAIL
CORPORATION LIMITED,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL MANAGER
LAND ACQUISITION SECTION,
M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.
4.
THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KIADB METRO RAIL PROJECT,
NRUTHUNGA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
5.
QUEENS GRANEO LLP.,
CARE OF TEA PAVILION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING PARTNER
MR. M. RAVINDRA KUMAR GOENKA,
NO.139, 5TH CROSS, 17TH MAIN,
6TH BLOCK, KHB COLONY,
KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE - 560 095.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.N. SUDEV HEGDE, AGA FOR R1
SRI. HARISH N.N., ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO A) CALL FOR RECORDS, IN WP
NO.7527/2022 B) ALLOW THE PRESENT APPEAL AND SET
ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 04/07/2024 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN WP
NO.7527/2022 AND C) DISMISS WP NO.7527/2022, AND PASS
ANY OTHER ORDER.
THIS WRIT APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
HC-KAR
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH) The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 04.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.7527/2022, instituted by respondent No.5, for quashing of the consent award dated 21.03.2020 for a sum of Rs.45,18,141/- and direction to the appellant herein to re-deposit the said amount.
2. The appellant claims to be tenant of the premises owned by the respondent No.5. The said property was acquired for the purpose of Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited1. The property would be measuring 130.958 square meters of land, upon which the premises on which the appellant is tenant. The compensation of Rs.4,94,89,788/- (Rupees Four Crores Ninety Four Lakhs Eight Nine Thousand Seven Hundred 1 "BMRCL" for short
HC-KAR
and Eighty Eight only) was determined as pay bill with the owner in respect of 130.958 square meter of land and another sum of Rs.47,30,274/- in respect of the land and the building, in 17.571 square meters of land and building constructed thereon was determined. The said amounts were determined as per Section 29(2) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act2 as consent award. Interestingly, the amount of Rs.45,18,141/- has been paid to the appellant who has no right to claim compensation of the land or building, except to receive the displacement allowance as per the policy of BMRCL Compensation and Resettlement Package (CRP) 20193.
3. Under the Policy of BMRCL, the appellant would be entitled to receive the following compensation for displacement etc.: "VI.Tenant-Commercial-
1. Shifting allowance per tenant:Rs.35,000
2. Business Loss Allowance:
2 "KIAD Act" for short 3 "Policy of BMRCL" for short
HC-KAR
a. Average payment of SGST upto Rs.5000 p.m - Allowance Rs.85,000
b. Average payment of SGST between Rs.5001 to Rs.15,000 p.m - Allowance Rs.1,70,000
c. Average payment of SGST above Rs.15001 p.m. - Allowance Rs.2,25,000.
d. If without SGST documentation - Allowance Rs.60,000
3. Business Premises Reestablishment Allowance per tenant: Rs.540 per sq.ft *Note: If not displaced, tenant will get BPRA only, and not the other allowances."
4. We are amazed to find that the appellant has been paid the entire compensation of the land and building on which he is a tenant, amounting to Rs.45,18,141/-. This is nothing but a fraud played by the appellant in collusion and connivance with the KIADB.
5. Except for the compensation as provided under Clause VI of the aforesaid policy, the appellant would not be entitled for any single penny in respect of the land and building measuring 17.571 square meter is concerned.
6. The learned Single Judge therefore, finding the glaring illegality and fraud committed in receiving the
HC-KAR
compensation of Rs.45,18,141/- has allowed the writ petition and set aside the consent award, which was passed on the consent given by the appellant, who has no right, title and interest, except to receive the compensation as provided under Clause VI of the Policy of BMRCL.
7. We find no error in the impugned judgment and order passed by the Writ Court, as the writ appeal is wholly without any merit and basis, and therefore, same is hereby dismissed.
Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE
Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE
RR CT:VS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2