Karnataka High Court
The Chief Engineer vs Ratnakar Jaiwant Argekar on 3 March, 2021
Author: Sachin Shankar Magadum
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF MARCH, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
M.F .A .NO.21998/2010 (LA C)
BETWEEN :
The Senior Regional En ginee r,
The Konkan Railway Corpora tion,
(A Government of India
Undertaking H aving its head
Office at B elapur B havan)
Sector 11, CB D B elapur,
Navi Mumba i 400 614,
Karwa r.
... APPELLANT
(B Y SRI G.K.Hiregouda r Adv.)
AN D :
1. Ratnak ar Jaiwa nt Argek ar,
Aged about 78 years,
Occ: Pensioner,
R/o Sedgeri, T q: Ankola.
2. The Special Land Acquisit ion Officer
(For Konkan Railway Corporat ion)
Kum ta.
... RESPONDENTS
(B Y SRI M.L.Vanti & Sri Murthy D.Naik Advts. For R.1)
(B y Sri V.S.Kalasoorm ath, HCGP for R.2)
This miscellaneous first appeal is filed u nder Sec tion
54( 1) of the Land Acquisit ion Act, against the judgm ent and
awa rd dated 30.11.2009 passed in LAC.No.17/2007 by the
Civil Judge (S r.Dn.), Kum ta and reject the reference and
may be please d t o pass suc h other order or judgment as
may be deemed fit in the c irc umsta nces of t he case in the
inte rest of justice and equit y.
2
This appeal coming on for hea ring on I.A., this da y,
the Court delivere d the following:
: JUDGMENT :
The cap tioned appeal is filed by the Konkan
Railway Corporation assailing the correctness of the
judgment and award passed in LAC.No.17/2007.
2. The land which is sub ject matter of the
app eal was acquired for the purpose of formation of
broad-g aug e railway line between Mang aluru-Mumb ai
and the same had acq uired under a p reliminary
notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition
Act ("the Act" for short) dated 17.06.1998. The Special
Land Acq uisition Officer passed an award fixing the
market value of Rs.2,500/- per gunta in respect of
Sy.No.108/A-4 measuring 1 acre gunta of Shedgeri
village in Ankola Taluka.
3. The 1st respondent being aggrieved by
inadequate compensation sought reference und er
Section 18 of the Act claiming higher comp ensation.
4. The reference petition was contested by the
app ellant-Corporation. The Reference Court having
examining the oral and documentary evidence on record
enhance the market value of Rs.15,640/- per gunta.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and award p assed by
the Reference Court, the Corporation is in app eal before
this Court.
5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
app ellant, respondent No.1-claimant as well as learned
Hig h Court Government Plead er for the 2 n d respondent.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the 1st
respondent would place reliance on judgment p assed by
this Court in MFA.No.21990/2010 and MFA.No.22001/
2010. Placing reliance on these two judgments, the
learned counsel for the 1 s t respondent-claimant would
submit this Court by placing the reliance on the
comp ensation d etermined for Seab ird Project wherein
the market value was determined at Rs.11,500/-. This
Court having reg ard to the date of preliminary
notification also held that the claimants are entitled for
3% escalations for a p eriod of five years. The nature of
land in the present appeal is id entical and issues are
covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in
MFA.No.21990/2010 and MFA.No.22001/2010. This
factual aspect is not seriously disputed by the counsel
app earing for the appellant as well as the counsel
app earing for respondent No.2.
7. The Reference Court has rightly taken note of
the judgment rendered by this Court in resp ect of
Seabird Project and I do not find any infirmity in
quantum determined by the Reference Court. In that
view of the matter, the g rounds urged in the appeal are
not at all sustainab le.
For the reasons stated sup ra, the app eal filed by
the corporation is dismissed.
Sd/-
JU DGE
EM /-
