Parvati Bai W/O Ramchander Since ... vs The State Through And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 3343 Kant

                              1




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   KALABURAGI BENCH

     DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER,2021

                          BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

                MSA No.1056/2013 (LAC)
Between:

Parvati Bai W/o late. Ramchander
Since deceased by her L.Rs
Ganesh S/o late Ramchander Sanga
Age: 55 Years, Occ: Agriculture
R/o Aland Taluk
Gulbarga District.
                                               ... Appellant

(By Smt. Hema L.K. & Sri D.K. Yusuf, Advocates)

And:

1.     The State through Special Land Acquisition Officer
       Major & Minor Irrigation Project
       Kalaburagi-585 103

2.     KNNL (Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd.,)
       Amarja Project, M & MI, Aiwan-E-Shahi
       Kalabauragi, Dist. Kalaburagi

                                           ... Respondents

(By Sri Sharanabasappa M. Patil, HCGP for R1;

Sri Gourish S. Khashampur, Adv. For R2)

This Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed under Section 54(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, praying to allow the appeal by modifying the judgment and award dated 21.04.2007 in LAC No.34/2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Aland and judgment and award dated 28.09.2010 in LACA No.18/2008 passed by the Fast Track Court-I, Gulbarga by granting compensation for the acquired wet land at Rs.2,02,000/- per acre along with all statutory benefits.

This appeal coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 'B' Group, this day, the Court delivered the following:-

JUDGMETN

This appeal is filed under Section 54(2) of the

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act')

challenging the judgment and award dated

28.09.2010 passed in LACA No.18/2008 by the Fast

Track Court-I, Gulbarga and the judgment and award

dated 21.04.2007 in LAC No.34/2006 passed by the

Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Aland.

2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal

is as under:

The appellant was the owner of the land

Sy.No.643/A, measuring 5 acres 34 guntas and

guntas of pot-kharab land situated at Aland. The

respondent No.1 issued preliminary notification dated

17.01.1991 and passed award on 30.08.1993

determining the market value of the acquired land at

Rs.17,000/- per acre for dry land. The appellant

being dissatisfied with the market value fixed by the

respondent filed the reference application under

Section 18(1) of the Act. The respondent No.1 has

referred the application to the reference Court. The

reference Court registered the reference application as

LAC No.34/2006.

3. The son of the original appellant was

examined as P.W.1 and examined one witness as

P.W.2 and got marked documents at Exs.P-1 to 25.

The respondent examined one witness as R.W.1 and

got marked documents at Exs.R1 and 2.

4. The reference Court after recording the

evidence, after hearing parties and upon considering

the material on record determined the market value of

the acquired land at Rs.56,700/- per acre treating the

acquired land as a wet land. The appellant being

aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the

reference Court, preferred appeal in LACA

No.18/2008. The first appellate Court on re-

appreciation of evidence re-determined the market

value and enhanced the compensation to

Rs.1,02,000/- per acre excluding the interest for the

delayed period in preferring the appeal. The appellant

being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by

the reference Court as well as first appellate Court has

filed this appeal.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant

and the learned counsel for the respondents.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant

submits that the lands acquired in MSA

No.200060/2017 is in the year 1997. Wherein the land

in question was acquired in the year 1991 and if the

market value determined in MSA No.200060/2017 is

taken into consideration, 5% de-escalation for every

year has to be adopted. She further submits that

after de-escalation for 6 years comes to Rs.2,27,090/-

per acre. On these grounds, she prays to allow the

appeal.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the

respondents supports the impugned judgments and

awards passed by the reference Court as well as first

appellate Court and prays to dismiss the appeal.

8. Perused the records and considered the

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

9. To decide the appeal, the following point

arises for consideration.

               Whether the appellant has made out
               grounds    for   interference   with     the
               judgment     and     awards     called    in
               question   and     for   enhancement      of
               compensation?

10. It is not in dispute that the appellant was

the owner of land in question and same was acquired

by the defendant No.1 under preliminary notification

dated 17.01.1991 and award came to be passed by

the respondent No.1 fixing the market value at

Rs.17,000/- per acre treating the acquired land as dry

land. The appellant being dissatisfied with the

compensation awarded by the respondent No.1 filed

reference petition under Section 18(1) of the Land

Acquisition Act. The reference Court after considering

the material on record determined the compensation

at Rs.56,700/- pr acre treating the acquired land as a

wet land. The appellant aggrieved by the same,

preferred appeal before the first appellate Court. The

appellate Court on re-appreciation of evidence re-

determined the compensation at Rs.1,02,000/- per

acre treating the acquired land as a wet land.

11. The learned counsel for the appellant has

relied upon the judgment of co-ordinate bench of this

Court in MSA No.200060/2017, wherein the

preliminary notification issued in the said case was of

the year 1997 i.e., dated 24.07.1997. In the present

case, the preliminary notification is dated 17.01.1991.

In MSA No.200060/2017, this Court determined the

market value of the acquired land therein at

Rs.3,24,416/- per acre along with all other statutory

benefits. Taking into consideration the judgment

passed in the aforesaid appeal, this Court is of the

opinion that if 5% of de-escalation every year is taken

into consideration in this case while enhancing the

compensation as Rs.3,24,416 x 5/100=Rs.16,220.8,

rounded off to Rs.16,221 x 6 = Rs.97,326/-, it comes

to Rs.2,27,090/- (Rs.3,24,416/- - Rs.97,326/-).

Thus, the appellant is entitled for market value of

acquired land at Rs.2,27,090/- per acre treating the

acquired land as wet land.

12. In view of the above discussion, the appeal

is allowed in part with costs. The judgment and award

passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.34/2006 is

modified. The appellant is entitled for compensation at

Rs.2,27,090/- per acre as against Rs.1,02,000/- per

acre as awarded by the appellate Court with all

statutory benefits.

13. This Court vide order dated 11.01.2017

while allowing the application filed by the appellant for

condonation of delay in filing the present appeal that

the appellant would not be entitled for interest on the

enhanced compensation for the delayed period.

Hence, the appellant is not entitled for interest for the

delayed period on the enhanced compensation. It is

needless to state that the appellant will not be also

entitled for interest for the delayed period in

preferring the appeal before the first appellate Court

in view of order to that effect passed by the first

appellate.

The appellant is directed to pay the deficit Court

fee on the enhanced compensation amount within a

period of one month from today.

Sd/-

JUDGE BL