BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR. versus STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

Citation: [2022] 1 S.C.R. 334 · Decided: 20-01-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. ABDUL NAZEER · Disposal: Disposed off
cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
334
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 1 S.C.R.
[2022] 1 S.C.R. 334
334
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.
v.
STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
(IA No. 147134/2021)
in
(Miscellaneous Application Nos. 1614- 1616/2019)
in
(C.A. Nos. 7661-7663/2018)
JANUARY 20, 2022
[S. ABDUL NAZEER AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.]
Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976: Object of its
legislation – The primary object of the BDA Act is to carry out a
planned development – Acquisition, is merely incident of such
planned development.
Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976: s.36 –
Applicability of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the acquisition made
under the 1976 Act – Held: The provisions of the LA Act would be
attracted only insofar as they are applicable to the BDA Act – Where
there are specific provisions under the BDA Act, the provisions of
the LA Act will not be attracted – The BDA Act provides a complete
process for determination of rights – For the purpose of the claims
in regard to the matters which are not specifically dealt with in the
BDA Act, reference to the LA Act in terms of s.36 is made – The
intention of the Legislature is to take recourse for the provisions of
the LA Act to a limited extent and subject to the supremacy of the
provisions of the BDA Act – Having regard to the language employed
in s.36, it is a legislation by incorporation – Thus, the provisions of
the LA Act continue to apply for acquisitions made in the BDA Act
so far as they are applicable as it is a legislation by incorporation
having regard to s.36 of the BDA Act – Legislation.
Offshore Holdings Private Limited v. Bangalore Development
Authority and others (2011) 3 SCC 139:[2011] 1 SCR 453 – followed
Legislation: Legislation by incorporation – Incorporation of
an earlier Act into the later Act is a legislative device for the sake
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
335
of convenience in order to avoid verbatim reproduction of the
provisions of the earlier Act into the later Act – Once the
incorporation is made, the provisions of incorporated statute become
an integral part of the statute in which it is transferred and thereafter
there is no need to refer to the statute from which incorporation is
made and any subsequent amendment made in it has no effect on
the incorporating statute – Bangalore Development Authority Act,
1976 – Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
C.N. Paramasivam and Another v. Sunrise Plaza
Through Partner and Others 2013 (9) SCC 460 : [2013]
4 SCR 1 – relied on.
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s.24 –
Applicability to acquisition made under the BDA Act – Held: s.24
of the 2013 Act expressly refers to the land acquisition proceedings
initiated under the LA Act – The 2013 Act repeals only the LA Act
and not any other Central or State enactment dealing with
acquisition – Therefore, what is sought to be saved under s.24 of
the 2013 Act is only acquisitions which had been initiated under
the LA Act and not those acquisitions which had been initiated under
any other Central or State enactment – 2013 Act would not regulate
the acquisition proceedings made under the BDA Act – Bangalore
Development Authority Act, 1976.
Sri. L. Ramareddy v. the State of Karnataka and Ors.
W.A. No.1415/2018 (LA-BDA) disposed of on 1st
December, 2020 – approved.
Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, Mysore and
Another v. Anasuya Bai (dead) by Legal Representatives
and others 2017 (3) SCC 313:[2017] 4 SCR 187 –
referred to.
Case Law Reference
[2011] 1 SCR 453
followed
Para 5
[2013] 4 SCR 1 
relied on
Para 1
[2017] 4 SCR 187
referred to
Para 15
BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. STATE OF
KARNATAKA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
336
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 1 S.C.R.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Miscellaneous Application
Nos. 1614-1616 of 2019 In Miscellaneous Application Nos. 1346-1348
of 2019 In Civil Appeal Nos. 7661-7663 of 2018.
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.04.2017 of the High Court
of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Appeal No.252 of 2016 (LA-BDA)
and Writ Appeal Nos. 2270-2271 of 2017.
G. V. Chandrashekar, R. Balasubramanian, Sr. Advs., S. K.
Kulkarni, M. Gireesh Kumar, Ankur S. Kulkarni, Ms. Uditha
Chakravarthy, N. K. Verma, Ms. Apeksha D., Ms. Anjana Chandrashekar,
Santosh Kumar Pandey, Advs. for the Appellants.
Prabhuling K. Navadgi, AG, Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Adv., V.
N. Raghupathy, D. K. Devesh, Durga Dutt, Ms. Anjul Dwivedi, Priyanshu
Upadhyay, Rajeev Kumar, Jitendra Nath Pathak, Ms. Anuradha Mutatkar,
T.
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.