Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board Can Acquire Land For A Single Company To Set Up An Industry: Supreme Court

  • Post category:Daily Judgments
  • Reading time:4 mins read

Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board Can Acquire Land For A Single Company To Set Up An Industry

Case: M.S.P.L. LIMITED vs State of Karnataka

Coram: Justices Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath

Case No.: CA 4678 OF 2021

Court Observation: “The words for the purpose of development by the Board, and or for any other purpose in furtherance of the objects of this Act make it amply clear that the intention to acquire land in the opinion of the State Government could be not only for the purpose of development by the Board but for any other purpose in furtherance of the objects of this Act. This gives power to acquire land beyond development by KIADB”

“This provision also contemplates acquiring land for the purpose of allotment to a single company to set up an industry. In the present case, the allotment by the Board is duly approved by the State Government…Therefore, the view expressed by the Division Bench that no acquisition could be made for a single company cannot be sustained.”

“Quashing the entire acquisition at the instance of one land owner having 4.34 acres of land out of total acquisition for MSPL of 110 acres, would be against the public policy and public interest. The MSPL alone provides employment to 292 persons with a substantial investment of Rs.200 crores. The employment to approximately 300 persons by MSPL is also alleged to be double of the number of employees as projected in the proposal. Further, in the case of AISL acquisition of 914 acres is challenged by a fraction of less than 10% land owners. The estimated project of AISL is approx Rs.2092 crores and would employment to at least one thousand persons”

Previous Posts

Section 204 CrPC – Magistrate’s Order Of Issuance Of Process Liable To Be Set Aside If No Reasons Are Given: Supreme Court

Four Months Time Breaking point U/Sec 19 PC Act To Choose A ‘Authorization Solicitation’ Compulsory; Yet Criminal Procedures Can’t Be Subdued For Deferral: Supreme Court

Lawyers Expected to Address Court with Deference, Judges also Should Refrain From Showing Needless Sensitivity On Counsel’s Utterances: Delhi HC

‘Rajnigandha Well Known Trademark, Entitled To Higher Degree Of Protection’: Delhi High Court Blocks Sale of Rajni Paan

Section 119 Evidence Act | Madras High Court Lays Down Principles For Examining Witnesses Who Are Unable To Speak

Keywords

Karnataka Industrial Area