M/S PURAVANKARA LTD vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA — WA/657/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 4. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 26th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: KAHC010132492026

Filing Number

WA/652/2026

Filing Date

18-Feb-2026

Registration No

WA/657/2026

Registration Date

21-Feb-2026

Judge

D K Singh , T.m.nadaf

Coram

D K Singh , T.m.nadaf

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

WA ( 145 )

Sub-Category

KIADB-Kar.Industrial Area Devpt.Board ( 189 )

Judicial Branch

Judicial Section

Decision Date

26-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED

Last updated 25-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 4

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S PURAVANKARA LTD

    Adv. JOSEPH ANTHONY

  2. 2.M/S KALPAK REALY PVT LTD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

  2. 2.THE KARNTAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVLOPMETN BOARD (KIADB)

  3. 3.THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER (SLAO)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 26-Mar-2026

    D K Singh,t.m.nadafView PDF

    The Karnataka High Court upheld the single judge's order remanding the land acquisition case to the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) to reconsider objections under the KIADB Act, but clarified that the SLAO must decide independently without being bound by the lower court's interpretation of circulars. The court directed parties to file additional objections within 10 days and the SLAO to pass a reasoned order within one month after providing personal hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 26-Mar-2026

    Fresh Matter/S

    D K Singh , T.m.nadaf

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Fresh Matter/S

    D K Singh , T.m.nadaf

  5. 04-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 18-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WA/657/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Karnataka High Court upheld the single judge's order remanding the land acquisition case to the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) to reconsider objections under the KIADB Act, but clarified that the SLAO must decide independently without being bound by the lower court's interpretation of circulars. The court directed parties to file additional objections within 10 days and the SLAO to pass a reasoned order within one month after providing personal hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case