Karnataka High Court
Executive Engineer vs Puttalakshmi on 19 April, 2021
Author: Alok Aradhe Kamal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
M.F.A. NO.1577 OF 2021 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
1. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PWD, HASSAN.
2. KARNATAKA ROAD DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LIMITED
(PRESENT ADDRESS)
SAMPARKA SOUDHA, NO.8
BEP PREMISES, OPPOSITE ORION MALL
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD
BANGALORE-5760010
REP. BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
MR. SANGAMESH G R.
.... APPELLANTS
(BY MR. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, AAG A/W
MR. MANU K, ADV.,)
AND:
1. PUTTALAKSHMI
W/O LATE ERASHETTY
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
HALUVAGILU VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK.
2. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
KARNATAKA.
2
3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
HASSAN.
... RESPONDENTS
---
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC.54(1) OF LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
20.4.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.354/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FILED U/S.18(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Mr.Dhyan Chinnappa, learned Additional Advocate
General along with Mr.Manu K, learned counsel for the
appellants.
None for the respondents though served.
2. In this appeal under Section 54(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for
short), the appellants have assailed the validity of the
judgment and award dated 20.04.2017 passed by the
Reference Court.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General, at the outset,
submitted that the controversy involved in this appeal is
squarely covered by the judgment of this Court dated
16.01.2021 passed in MFA No.6390/2019 (LAC).
4. We have considered the submissions made by the
learned Additional Advocate General and have perused the
record. We find that the issue involved in this appeal is
squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in MFA
No.6390/2019 (LAC) decided on 16.01.2021.
5. For the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgment,
the impugned judgment and award dated 20.04.2017 passed
by the Reference Court is hereby quashed and the matter is
remitted to the Reference Court for decision afresh in
accordance with law. Needless to state that the Reference
Court shall also afford an opportunity to the claimants as well
as to the appellants herein to adduce evidence and thereafter
to decide the market value of the land in question afresh in
accordance with law.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed
any opinion on the merits of the case as the market value of
the lands has to be determined by the Reference Court on
the basis of the material adduced before it. Since, the
acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 2008, we
deem it appropriate to direct the Reference Court to conclude
the proceedings expeditiously preferably within a period of
six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order
passed today.
7. The parties before us undertake to cooperate with
the Reference Court for early conclusion of the proceedings
and not to seek any unnecessary adjournments. The parties
shall appear before the Reference Court along with the copy
of this order on 14.06.2021.
8. In cases where parties are represented through
counsel before this Court, counsel for both the parties
undertake that the parties shall remain present before the
Reference Court on 14.06.2021. In remaining cases,
Reference Court shall issue notice to the parties for their
appearance.
In the result, the appeal is disposed of.
9. In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending
interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for
consideration and are accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
