Karnataka HC allows family to alienate property already notified, to treat terminally ill members
Bengaluru, Apr 13: A family living in the city has been allowed by the High Court of Karnataka to alienate a part of their property even though it has already been notified for acquisition.
The Court's exceptional order came as three of the family members are cancer patients who need timely treatment.
Justice Krishna S Dixit in his judgement on March 27 said, "In the exceptional circumstances of this case, denying relief to terminally ailing citizens, especially when their property in question is the only means of holding the body and soul together by securing medical treatment, would render the constitutional guarantee to life a mere farce.
"To put it in the words of late Antonin Scalia of the US Supreme Court, the Constitution will be nothing more than a 'parchment guarantee'. Therefore, petitioners need to be permitted to alienate or encumber a reasonable portion of the property that is still in the initial process of acquisition so that they can keep their life boat afloat."
Allowing the family to alienate 50 per cent of the property, the HC in its judgment said, "If the petitioners are not permitted to encumber or alienate the subject property which is their only source of income, from which the required medical treatment can be hopefully bought, they may fall prey to the predatory disease of the kind; thus, the long pendency of acquisition process itself would imperil their life unless some 'exit strategy' is worked out within the framework of the law consistent with the requirement of justice of the times, in which petitioners are placed by the conspiracy of circumstances beyond their control."
Five members of the family had approached the HC seeking permission to alienate their property of 2 acres and 3 guntas of land which was notified for acquisition under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act.
The petition was filed "since the funds are urgently needed for the medical treatment of some of them who are suffering from the hereditary terminal disease i.e., cancer of varying stages."
Ruling in their favour, the HC said, "Where the life of a citizen depends upon a certain property and the same is being taken away in an acquisition process, though lawfully launched, the delayed accomplishment of the said process and the delay that would eventually be brooked in the payment of compensation till such accomplishment happens, in the given circumstances of the case, would metaphorically amount to taking away the 'oxygen mask' from the gasping patient in the Intensive Care Unit."
The five people who approached the court seeking relief are a 72-year-old woman and her four children. The woman and her two sons are suffering from cancer.
The only daughter is taking care of them, and the 2 acre 3 guntas of property was the only source of income for the family.
The counsel for Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) informed the court that the acquisition process was delayed due to disputes with other property owners and could not be speeded up.
The buyers of the property would have the right to claim compensation from KIADB when the acquisiton is complete.
"The buyers/mortgagees shall have right to claim compensation or its enhancement, should acquisition of the property be accomplished in due course and in the case of delayed acquisition, to lay a claim for interest," the HC said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Your past conduct shows words are cheap: Siddaramaiah on Shah's 'outrage' over atrocities on women
Bengaluru (PTI): Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Wednesday took at swipe at Union Home Minister Amit Shah’s expression of outrage over the alleged sexual abuse of several women by JD(S) Lok Sabha candidate Prajwal Revanna.
Amit Shah on Wednesday said in Hubballi that the "BJP cannot remain with those who commit atrocities against women", referring to the Prajwal case.
“Dear Amit Shah avare, thanks for finally expressing outrage in the #PrajwalRevanna matter,” Siddaramaiah said in a post on social media platform X. “You have also said you don’t condone violence against women even if it is done by an ally of yours. One is tempted to believe you, but your conduct in the past has shown that talk is cheap.”
Siddaramaiah asked how anyone can forget how the Olympian wrestlers were sexually harassed by a BJP MP, Brij Bhushan Singh.
“Who did you stand with? Your MP, of course, and you let the women athletes sit in protests on the streets of Delhi for weeks,” the chief minister recalled.
Siddaramaiah said, “Can we forget how the rapist convicts of the Bilkis Bano (case) were released on parole by the Gujarat BJP government and your party men garlanded them? It took the Supreme Court to reprimand your party’s state government.”
He asked if anyone can forget how the BJP stood behind the perpetrators in the Unnao case, where a minor Dalit girl was raped and murdered.
“Can we forget how your party defended the perpetrators of rape in the Hathras case? Can we forget how the BJP turned a blind eye when women were made to parade naked in Manipur?” he asked.
He said, “Women of the nation know the truth, and it's time for you to wake up to the reality.”
Prajwal, the grandson of former prime minister and JD(S) patriarch H D Deve Gowda and son of former minister H D Revanna, is seeking re-election from Hassan on the JD(S) ticket.
Just before the elections, a huge cache of explicit videos and photographs, allegedly involving Prajwal indulging in the sexual abuse of several women, have gone viral on social media.
The Karnataka government constituted a SIT on the request of Karnataka State Commission for Women chairperson Nagalakshmi Chowdhary to investigate the allegations against the Hassan MP.
A case has been registered against both Revanna and his son Prajwal at Holenarasipura based on a complaint lodged by their former cook and relative for allegedly sexually harassing her. She alleged that Prajwal made video calls to her daughter and spoke in an objectionable manner, which forced her to block him.
