Venkareddy S/O Hanumareddy vs The Assistant Commissioner/Land
2021 Latest Caselaw 7013 Kant

                            1


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                        PRESENT

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

                           AND

        THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. RACHAIAH


             M.F.A. No. 101130/2018 (LAC)

BETWEEN:

VENKAREDDY S/O HANUMAREDDY KALADGI,
AGE:60 YRS, OCC:AGRL,
R/O ALAWANDI,
TQ AND DIST:KOPPAL 583226.
                                          ..... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.J. APPANNAVAR, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.     THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/LAND
       ACQUISITION OFFICER,
       KOPPAL - 583231.

2.     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
       MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION,
       KUSTAGI, DIST:KOPPAL - 584121.
                                         .....RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHIVAPRABHU HIREMATH, AGA)

      THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION
ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
01.03.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.270/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE
                              2

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KOPPAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
REFERENCE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 18(1) OF LAND
ACQUISITION.

     THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
ON 21.12.2021, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT THIS DAY, S.RACHAIAH J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                        JUDGMENT

The claimant/appellant has filed this appeal against

the judgment and award passed in L.A.C. No.270/2014

dated 01.03.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Koppal

seeking enhancement of compensation and fixing the

market value in accordance with law.

2. The claimant is the owner of the property

bearing Sy.No.284/1 measuring 10 acres 6 guntas situated

at Alawandi village of Koppal Taluka. The land of the

appellant was acquired in pursuance of the preliminary

notification issued on 19.01.2012. The land was black

mixed red soil and fertile land. The appellant used to grow

two crops in a year like mungari and hingari crops and

they were growing groundnut, sunflower, cotton, turdal,

chilli and maize etc. The appellant was earning a good

amount from the said land. The Land Acquisition

Officer/respondents have not considered the said facts and

passed the award by fixing the meagre amount of market

value of Rs.51,560/- per acre dated 31.10.2014.

3. Being aggrieved by the said market value, the

claimant/appellant has preferred an appeal before the

reference Court under Section 18(1) of the Land

Acquisition Act. The reference Court after having

considered the similar appeals of same notification namely

M.A.No.2/2016 and M.A.No.6/2016 enhanced the market

value for a sum of Rs.2,04,767/- per acre. Being

aggrieved by the said meagre enhancement, the appellant

preferred this appeal seeking further enhancement.

4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for

the claimant/appellant that the reference Court has

committed an error in not considering the suitability of the

land and also not considering the similarly situated lands

and passed the award which is erroneous. The reference

Court has considered earlier orders relating to the adjacent

land and passed the award. In the said two miscellaneous

appeals, the preliminary notification was issued on

12.04.2007 whereas in the instant case, the preliminary

notification was issued dated 19.01.2012. The appellant is

entitled for escalation price at the rate of 10% per year.

The said aspect has been ignored by the reference Court.

Hence, injustice caused to the claimant. Further he

submitted that in an identical issue, the market value is

fixed Rs.3,15,255/- per acre bearing Sy.No.335/AA

(335/1), situated adjacent to the Sy.No.284/1 of Alawandi

village. Hence, the claimant herein is entitled to have the

same compensation on the ground of 'principles of parity'.

Hence, he submitted to enhance and fix the market value

on par with Sy.No.335 which is adjacent to the land in

question.

5. Per contra, learned Addl. Government

Advocate has vehemently argued and submitted that the

market value is fixed after considering the land and its

fertility and also the crops which were growing in the said

land. The Land Acquisition Officer/respondents have

properly fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.51,560/-

per acre. However, the reference Court exorbitantly

enhanced and fixed the market value at the rate of

Rs.2,04,767/- per acre which is held to be sufficient and

this Court cannot interfere with the same. Hence, he

prays to reject the appeal.

6. Heard both the parties and perused the

records. The following point for consideration arises:

"Whether the appellant has made out a case

for enhancing the compensation granted by the

reference court?"

After having considered the rival submissions of the

parties, it is necessary to reassess the entire market value

of the land which is the subject matter of this case.

7. Firstly, the claimant herein has made available

the certified copy of LAC No.44/2020 wherein the Principal

District and Sessions Judge, Koppal awarded compensation

and fixed market value for a sum of Rs.3,15,255/- per acre

which pertains to Sy.No.335/AA (335/1) measuring 1 acre

00 guntas situated at Alawandi village in Koppal Taluk and

he is seeking fixation of compensation on 'principles of

parity'.

8. The learned Addl. Government Advocate has

produced a sketch which pertains to the lands which were

acquired for the purpose of construction of percolation

tank along with memo dated 04.12.2021. The said

document which is annexed as Annexure-R1 which clearly

indicates that the property in which Sy.No.335 seen in the

sketch and it appears that Sy.No.284/1 which is the

subject matter of this appeal is situated adjacent to the

said land. And further it appears that in a notification

dated 19.01.2012 some of the survey numbers including

these two survey numbers have been acquired by the land

acquisition officer for the purpose of construction of

percolation tank.

9. The submission of the claimant/appellant has

substantial merit which impels this Court to look into the

facts and circumstances of the similar case. Hence, this

Court is of the opinion that the benefit of the

award/compensation which the reference Court has

granted in LAC No.44/2020 is required to be extended in

this case also.

10. In the light of the above observations, it is

necessary to enhance and fix the market value at the rate

of Rs.3,15,255/- per acre which is considered as a fair

market value.

11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The point

for consideration is answered in the affirmative. The

judgment and award dated 01.03.2017 passed in L.A.C.

No.270/2014 is set aside and the same is modified. The

claimant/landowner is entitled to compensation of

Rs.3,15,255/- per acre with all statutory benefits and

interest.

12. The claimant/appellant is directed to pay the

Court fee on enhanced amount, if needs to be paid.

13. It is made clear that the claimant is not

entitled for any interest for the delay of 282 days in filing

this appeal.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

Naa