1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY
M.F.A. NO.5817 OF 2015 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
1. M. SHEKARAPPA.
2. M. ESHWARAPPA.
3. M. NINGAPPA.
ALL ARE MAJOR
R/AT. NAVULE, SHIMOGGA
REP. BY GPA HOLDER
SHIVANNA, S/O BOREGOWDA
R/AT. ASHOKANAGAR LAYOUT
WARD NO.30, SHIMOGA-577201.
... APPELLANTS
(BY MR. SANGAMESH G. PATIL, ADV.,)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, UTP
SHIMOGA-577201.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
UTP, SHIMOGA-577201.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. PRASHANTH, ADV., FOR
MR. M.R.C. RAVI, ADV., FOR R2
MR. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, AGA FOR R1)
2
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND
ACQUISITION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
10.08.2004 PASSED IN LAC NO.55/2001 ON THE FILE OF THE
PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), CJM, SHIMOGA, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) by the claimants seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation, against the judgment dated 10.08.2004 passed by the Reference Court.
2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the appellants are the owners of land measuring 6 acres of Sy.No.30 situate at Basavanagangur village, which was acquired for Upper Tunga Project. Thereupon, the proceeding was initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Act 3 was issued on 28.08.1997 and land was acquired and final notification was published on 23.02.1998. Thereafter, an award was passed on 07.07.2001. Therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer assessed the compensation at the rate of Rs.18,700/- per acre. Thereupon the appellants sought reference seeking enhancement of the compensation. The Reference Court vide judgment dated 10.08.2004 fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre.
3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the issue with regard to determination of market value of the land in question is squarely covered by judgment of this court dated 13.01.2020 passed in M.F.A.No.8200/2015. It is further submitted that the land of the appellants is also situated at Basavanagangur Village, which has been acquired for Upper Tunga Project and is similarly situated to the lands involved in M.F.A.No.8200/2015.On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent 4 submitted that the amount awarded by Reference Court is just and proper and does not call for any interference.
4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The Supreme Court in 'ALI MOHAMMAD BEIGH AND ORS. VS. STATEOF J AND K', AIR 2017 SC 1518 while following the decision in 'UNION OF INDIA VS. HARINDER PAL SINGH AND OTHERS', (2005) 12 SCC 564, held that if the lands are similarly situated and are identical and similar, it would be unfair to discriminate between the land owners with the matter of grant of compensation. It is pertinent to note that the lands have been acquired under the same notification and for same purpose i.e., for Upper Tunga Project. It is also pertinent to mention here that the land of the appellants is at the same village viz., Basavanagangur Village and has potentiality for non agricultural use. Therefore, we find that the land of the appellants are similarly situate as that of land involved in 5 M.F.A.No.8200/2015 in the aforesaid judgment, in respect of the lands covered under the same Notification and for the same purpose and has potentiality for urban use. In the aforesaid judgment, we have already determined the market value of land at Rs.105/- per square feet. Therefore, in order to maintain the parity, the market value of the land in question is assessed at the rate of Rs.105/- per square feet. Needless to state that the appellants shall be entitled to solatium as well as statutory benefits, which are admissible to them under the provisions of the Act. To the aforesaid extent, the award passed by the Reference Court is modified.
In the result, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE ss