https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468355 A preliminary acquisition notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 is only an initial step in the statutory process, so it is not vitiated merely because it follows a prior decree in favour of the landowners; absent independent proof of mala fides, colourable exercise of power or collateral purpose, the challenge fails. The Court also held that simultaneous issuance of notifications under Sections 1(3), 3(1) and 28(1) was not prohibited by the Act and did not by itself invalidate the acquisition notice. The impugned orders were set aside, leaving the landowners to pursue objections in the statutory proceedings. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Apr 2026 15:33:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468355 A preliminary acquisition notification under Section 28(1) of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966 is only an initial step in the statutory process, so it is not vitiated merely because it follows a prior decree in favour of the landowners; absent independent proof of mala fides, colourable exercise of power or collateral purpose, the challenge fails. The Court also held that simultaneous issuance of notifications under Sections 1(3), 3(1) and 28(1) was not prohibited by the Act and did not by itself invalidate the acquisition notice. The impugned orders were set aside, leaving the landowners to pursue objections in the statutory proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468355