Boraiah, vs Manjanna

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Nov 03, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1768104

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1768104
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: Chief Justice,C.M. Poonacha
Decided On: Nov 03, 2025
Case Number: MFA/6591/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Boraiah,

Respondent

Manjanna

Excerpt

.....under section 37 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 praying to set aside the impugned judgement and award dtd: 31-7-2025 passed by the prl.district and sessionsjudge, at chitradurga in a.c.no.2/2019 an consequently, allow the above appeal and award the compensation amount so deposited by the national highway authority, slao for acquiring 2,424 sqr. mtrs. of land in sy.no.22 of mallapura village in favour of appellant and etc. this appeal, coming on for orders, this day,judgment was delivered therein as under:coram: hon'ble mr. vibhu bakhru, chief justice andhon'ble mr. justice c.m. poonachaoral judgment(per: hon'ble mr. vibhu bakhru, chief justice)1. the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed amemo seeking to withdraw the present appeal. the memo indicates that the appellant seeks liberty to file an appeal under section 37 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 [a&c act]. however, it does not appear that there is any arbitral award, which can be challenged under section 37 of the a&c act.2. accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. -4-3. however, it is clarified that this would not preclude the appellant from availing all such remedies as otherwise available in law. (vibhu bakhru) chief justice (c.m. poonacha) judge ahb list no.: 1 sl no.: 7

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6591 OF 2025 (AA) BETWEEN:
1. BORAIAH S/O SANNA MADAIAH R/O MUTHAYYANAHATTI VILLAGE CHITRADURGA TALUK - 577 501 …APPELLANT (BY SRI GURUDATH V.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N, ADVOCATE) Digitally AND: signed by
AMBIKA H B     1.    MANJANNA
Location:            S/O B.C.CHINNAPPA
High Court           AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
of Karnataka         AGRICULTURIST
2. GEETHAMMA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
3. RAKESH S/O B. CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS -2-
4. THIPPESWAMY S/O MANJANNA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
5. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, (SLAO - NHAI) KSRTC DEPOT ROAD CHITRADURGA - 577 501
6. MANJAMMA D/O. CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
7. PALAMMA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
8. THIPPESWAMY S/O. B. CHINNAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
9. RAJESH S/O. MANJANNA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
10. CHINNAPPA S/O. LATE BAYANNA ALL RESPONDENT No.1 TO 4 AND RESPONDENT No.5 TO 10 ARE R/O. MUTHAYYANAHATTI VILLAGE CHITRADURGA TALUK - 577 501. …RESPONDENTS -3- THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 37 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DTD: 31-7-2025 PASSED BY THE PRL.DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE, AT CHITRADURGA IN A.C.NO.2/2019 AN CONSEQUENTLY, ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT SO DEPOSITED BY THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, SLAO FOR ACQUIRING 2,424 SQR. MTRS. OF LAND IN SY.NO.22 OF MALLAPURA VILLAGE IN FAVOUR OF APPELLANT AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has filed a

memo seeking to withdraw the present appeal. The memo indicates that the appellant seeks liberty to file an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [A&C Act]. However, it does not appear that there is any arbitral award, which can be challenged under Section 37 of the A&C Act.

2. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. -4-

3. However, it is clarified that this would not preclude the appellant from availing all such remedies as otherwise available in law. (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE AHB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2025 Same Parties Boraiah, vs Manjanna Same Judge Chief Justice,C.M. Poonacha