Karnataka High Court
Devarao vs The Spl.Land Acquisition Officer ... on 10 November, 2021
Bench: M.G.S.Kamal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.G.S.KAMAL
MSA.No.200215/2017 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
DEVARAO S/O MARTHANDA RAO
AGE: 70 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: GOBBUR-K
TQ: AFZALPUR DIST: KALABURAGI
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL,
ADVOCATE)
AND:
01. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
FOR M & MIP,
KALABURAGI-585 102.
02. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAYA T. R. HCGP)
2
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL IS FILED
UNDER SECTION 54 (2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT
PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE PRL.
CIVIL JUDGE (SR. DN) KALABURAGI DATED 28.11.1998 IN
LAC.NO.1252/1997 AND ALSO JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF
IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KALABURAGI
DATED 14.09.2015 IN LACA.NO.136/2013 AND FIX THE
MARKET VALUE AT THE RATE OF `.80,000/- PER ACRE
AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 54 (2) of the Land
Acquisition Act, (henceforth referred as "of the L.A. Act") is
filed by the claimant aggrieved by the judgment and award
dated 28.11.1998 passed in LAC.No.1252/1997 on the file
of Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Gulbarga and judgment and
award passed in LACA.No.136/2013 dated 14.09.2015
passed by the IV District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi.
02. The brief facts leading upto filing of the present
appeal are that claimant was the absolute owner of land
measuring 01 acre 06 guntas bearing Sy.No.15/3 situated
at Gobbur (K) village Tq: Afzalpur Dist: Kalaburagi. The
said land was proposed to be acquired by the respondents
in terms of notification dated 11.04.1985 issued under
Section 4 (1) of the L. A. Act for the purpose of
construction of Tank. The SLAO by its award dated
28.07.1987 determined the market value of the subject
land at `.2,100/- per acre. Being dissatisfied with the
compensation, the claimant sought for reference under
Section 18(1) of the L. A. Act. Accordingly, the matter was
referred to Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) Gulbarga in
LAC.No.1252/1997.
03. Before the reference Court the claimant
examined himself as PW.1 and produced four documents
as Exs.P.1 to Ex.P.4. The reference Court on evaluation of
the material on record assessed the market value of the
acquired land at `.8,500/- per acre. Being dissatisfied with
the compensation awarded by the reference Court, the
claimant has preferred an appeal before the IV Additional
District and Sessions Judge, Kalaburagi in
LACA.No.136/2013 seeking enhancement of compensation.
The First Appellate Court by impugned judgment and
award of the reference Court in LAC.No.1252/1997 dated
28.11.1998, enhanced the market value of the acquired
land at the rate of `.40,392/- per acre.
04. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and
award the claimant is before this Court by way of this
Miscellaneous Second Appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
05. The learned counsel for the appellant -
claimant reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal
memorandum submitted that the reference Court as well
as the First Appellate Court grossly erred in not assessing
the market value of the acquired land properly and
granting adequate and just compensation by taking into
consideration the lands similarly situated to that of the
subject land. The learned counsel for the appellant referred
to a judgment in LACA.No.107/2017 in respect of land
acquired under the notification dated 19.03.1990 of
Kamalapur village, wherein the market value of the
acquired land has been fixed at the rate of `.1,82,842/-
per acre and the judgment in LACA.No.243/2016 in respect
of notification of the year 1984 wherein the market value
of the acquired land is determined at the rate of
`.1,46,757/- per acre and also the judgment in
LACA.No.407/2016 in respect of notification dated
31.03.1997 wherein the compensation for dry lands
acquired for the similar purpose have been fixed the
market value at the rate of `.1,12,230/- per acre. The
learned counsel for the appellant has filed a memo dated
25.08.2021 along with the judgment of the Coordinate
Bench of this Court in MSA.No.200117/2017 (LAC)
dated 19.02.2018 in the case of Chandrasha s/o
Siddappa vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
wherein in respect of land situated at Harkachi village
subject matter of acquisition under the notification dated
11.04.1985 taken into consideration of the judgment
passed in LACA.No.276/2015, this Court has awarded
compensation of `.1,20,814/- per acre. Referring to the
aforesaid exemplars, the learned counsel for the appellant
contended that common factor in all these judgments is
that all lands are situated in the district of Kalaburagi. He
submits that compensation in respect of the acquired land
belonging to the claimant be also considered in the similar
lines. The land being dry land in nature acquired for the
minor irrigation purpose. Thus, he submits that the claim
made by the claimant in this appeal seeking enhancement
to `.80,000/- per acre is just and proper and judgment
and award of the reference Court and the First Appellate
Court could be modified to that effect.
06. Per contra, the learned counsel for the
respondents submits that the exemplars being relied up by
the learned counsel for the claimant cannot be taken into
consideration, as location of the said acquired land are at
distinct and different places. Therefore, she submits that
the compensation determined by the First Appellate Court
is just and proper. She further submits that the claimant
has not produced any material to place them in similar
position to claim the enhanced compensation. Hence,
sought for dismissal of the appeal.
07. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
08. The only point that arise for consideration is;
"Whether the claimant has made out
any grounds for enhancement of
compensation?."
09. The acquired land belonging to the claimant is
not disputed. The acquisition of land for the purpose of
minor irrigation under the notification dated 11.04.1985
and subsequent reference thereof to the reference Court
and same being within time is not dispute. Though the
reference Court had determined the market value of the
acquired land at `.8,500/- per acre, same has been
enhanced in the First Appellate Court to `.40,392/- per
acre.
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Special Land Acquisition Officer vs. Karigowda and
others reported (2010) 5 SCC 708 at Para No.75 has
held as under:-
"It is a settled principle of law that lands of
adjacent villages can be made the basis for
determining the fair market value of the acquired
land. This principle of law is qualified by clear
dictum of this Court itself that whenever direct
evidence i.e., instances of the same villages are
available, then it is most desirable that the court
should consider that evidence. But where such
evidence is not available court can safely rely upon
the sales statistics of adjoining lands provided the
instances are comparable and the potentiality and
location of the land is somewhat similar. The
evidence tendered in relation to the land of the
adjacent villages would be a relevant piece of
evidence for such determination. Once it is shown
that situation and potential of the land in two
different villages are the same then they could be
awarded similar compensation or such other
compensation as would be just and fair."
11. The exemplars in the nature of judgment
(precedent) produced along with the memo filed by the
learned counsel for the appellant are as under:-
Sl Case No. Notification Land Village Compensation
No Sy.No.
01 LAC.407/2016 31.03.1977 - Bidanoor `.1,12,230/- for
and connected dry land
matters `.1,68,345/- to
irrigated land
02 MSA.200117 11.04.1985 10 Harkanchi `.1,20,814/-
/2017
03 LACA.107/2017 19.03.1990 368/1-a Kamalapur `.1,82,842/-
and 108/2017 368/1 Kalaburagi
04 LAC.243/2016 19.03.1998 220/2 Kardal `.2,40,586/-
12. Exemplars in the nature of judgment
(precedent) as extracted hereinabove indicate that the
lands of similar nature acquired for the similar purpose
within the district of Kalaburagi have been awarded the
compensation in the range of `.1,12,000/- to `.1,20,000/-
per acre. Considering the proximity of the dates of
notification situation of land within the district of
Kalaburagi and also the purpose of acquisition being
similar, the present claimant would also be entitled for
enhancement of compensation. Though there is no specific
material evidence produced by the claimant seeking
enhancement of compensation to `.80,000/- per acre
except producing the judgments and award as referred
above, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in
the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer vs.
Karigowda and others, supra it is just and proper that
the compensation as awarded by the First Appellate Court
at `.40,392/- to be enhanced at the rate of `.70,000/- per
acre which would meet the ends of justice.
13. In the result, the following;
` ORDER
The MSA.No.200215/2017 is partly allowed with
costs.
The appellant - claimant is held entitled for the
compensation at the rate of `.70,000/- per acre instead of
`.40,397/- per acre as awarded by the First Appellate
Court, with all statutory benefits.
It is made clear that there was delay in filing the first
appeal and second appeal, hence the appellant - claimant
is not entitled for the interest for the delayed period.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KJJ
