G Honnur Sab S/O. G Khasim Sab vs Assistant Commissioner Cum Land ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4030 Kant

                                  1




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                      DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021

                             BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

                     M.S.A. No.100067/2014

Between

G.Honnur Sab, S/o G.Khasim Sab,
Age: 52 years, Occ: Agril.,
R/o. 1st Ward, Chittawadgi,
Hospet, Dist: Bellary.                             ...Appellant

(By Sri. Laxman T.Mantagani, Sri N.J.Appannavar & Sri
G.R.Turamari, Advocates)

And

1. Assistant Commissioner-cum-
    Land Acquisition Officer,
   Hospet.

2. The Hospeth City Municipal
    Council, represented by its
   Municipal Commissioner,
   Hospet.                                      ...Respondents

(By Sri. R.Ravindra Naik, HCGP for R1
    Sri. Gangadhar J.M., Advocate for R2)

      This MSA is filed under Section 54(2) of the Land
Acquisition Act, against the judgment and decree dated
05.03.2014 passed in Misc. Appeal No.20/2012 on the file of the
III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bellary, sitting at
                                    2




Hospet, dismissing the appeal filed against the judgment and
decreed dated 29.10.2011 passed in LAC No.27/2009, on the file
of the Principal Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Hospet, allowing the
petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

      This MSA coming on for Admission this day, the Court
delivered the following:


                             JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 54(2) of the Land Acquisition

Act (for short, 'the Act') is filed against the judgment and award

dated 05.03.2014 passed by the III Additional District &

Sessions Judge, Bellary, sitting at Hospet, in Misc. Appeal

No.20/2012 confirming the judgment and award dated

29.10.2011 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge & JMFC,

Hospet, in L.A.C. No.27/2009.

2. Land bearing Sy.No.105B/1 measuring 0.92 acres

situated within the Municipal limits of Hospet was acquired for

the purpose of Hindu grave yard by issuing preliminary

notification dated 02.03.2006 under Section 4(1) of the Act

which culminated in passing of an award dated 26.10.2006. The

Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the land in

question at Rs.1,43,600/- per acre. Being dissatisfied with the

quantum of compensation, the claimant filed a petition under

Section 18(1) of the Act seeking enhancement of the

compensation.

3. The Reference Court relying on exemplar at Ex.P.6

fixed the market value of the land in question at Rs.3,00,000/-

per acre against which the claimant filed an appeal under

Section 54(1) of the Act before the jurisdictional District Court.

The District Court confirmed the market value determined by the

Reference Court and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Hence,

this second appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits

that the Reference Court has fixed the marked value by relying

on the sale deed at Ex.P.6. He submits that the Reference Court

committed an error in deducting 75% towards development

charges, which is on the higher side. Hence, he submits that the

market value of the land in question may be determined by

deducting reasonable amount towards development charges.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent

No.2-beneficiary of the acquisition, submits that the market

value determined by the Reference Court is just and proper and

the same does not require any interference.

6. Learned High Court Government Pleader appearing

for respondent No.1 reiterates the submission made by the

learned counsel for respondent No.2 and sought for dismissal of

the appeal.

7. I have considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on

record.

8. It is not in dispute that the land is situated within the

municipal limits of Hospet Town. Before the Reference Court, the

claimant produced sale deed at Ex.P.6 which pertains to a plot

measuring 5 cents which was sold for Rs.1,00,000/- i.e.,

Rs.20,000/- per cent. The Reference Court relied on the

exemplar at Ex.P.6, but while determining the market value, the

Reference Court after deducting 50% towards development costs

has again deducted a further sum of Rs.50,000/- towards

development charges which is not permissible. Having regard to

the fact that land in question is situated within the municipal

limits and entire extent of land is utilized for the purpose for

which it was acquired, it would be appropriate to fix the market

value of the land in question at Rs.10,00,000/- per acre after

deducting 50% towards development charges as against 1/3rd

which is normally deducted. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

The market value of the land in question is fixed at

Rs.10,00,000/- per acre with all statutory benefits, costs and

interest. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the

above extent. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Deficit Court fee, if any, to be made good at the time of

drawing up of the award.

Sd/-

JUDGE Kms