Shantabai vs The Slao
2022 Latest Caselaw 2970 Kant

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                  DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                        PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT

                             AND

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

                  MFA No.102506/2016

BETWEEN:

SHANTABAI
W/O. LALAPPA LAMANI
R/O. JALAGERI,
TAL: BADAMI.
                                          ...CLAIMANT
(BY SRI. M.M. PATIL, ADV.)

AND

1.    THE SLAO, MP III DHARWAD

2.    THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
      M.B.C. DIVN NO.1,
      BAGALKOT.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHIVARAJ C. BELLAKKI ADV FOR R2)
(SRI. G.K. HIREGOUDAR, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR R1)

     THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE
LA ACT, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO ENHANCE THE
MARKET VALUE OF RS.50,00,000/- PER ACRES TO THE
APPELLANT AS LAND BEARING R.S.NO.148/2 MEASURING 38
GUNTAS SITUATED AT JALGERI VILLAGE OF BADAMI TALUK
                                2



MEASURING 38 GUNTAS, AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS BY MODIFYING THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD
DATED 21.09.2011 PASSED IN LAC NO.85/2009 BY THE
HON'BLE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BADAMI AND PASS ANY
SUCH JUDGMENT AND AWARD AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
DEEMS FIT INCLUDING AWARDING OF COST IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.


     THIS       APPEAL     COMING     ON    FOR   HEARING   -
INTERLOCUTORY APPLN, THIS DAY, ANANT RAMANATH
HEGDE., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                           JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed under Section 54(1) of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"

for short) by challenging the judgment and award dated

21.09.2021 passed in LAC No.85/2009 by the Senior Civil

Judge, Badami (hereinafter referred to as "reference

Court" for short), seeking for enhancement of

compensation.

guntas situated at Jalageri Village of Badami Taluk was

acquired under the provisions of the Act. In terms of the

award dated 30.03.2009, the Special Land Acquisition

Officer determined the market value at Rs.27,301/- per

acre. The land losers sought for reference under Section

18 of the Act and claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-

per acre. This claim was opposed by the State. The

reference Court adjourned the matter by providing

opportunity to the claimant to lead evidence. However,

the claimant has not appeared before the reference Court

to lead the evidence in support of his claim for

enhancement of the compensation. The reference Court

placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in

the matter of Special Land Acquisition Officer

Belgaum V. Siddappa Omanna Tumari1 has held that

burden of proving the claim is on the claimant and inspite

of sufficient opportunity given to the claimant to led the

evidence, the claimant has not lead evidence in support of

the claim for higher compensation and accordingly,

rejected the petition.

1994 (5) Kar.L.J. 428A

3. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant

would urge before this Court that sufficient opportunity is

not given to the claimant to lead his evidence and the

reference Court hurriedly proceeded to decide the case

without afford one more opportunity to the claimant to

lead evidence. The learned counsel would also urge that

award of meager compensation of Rs.27,301/- per acre is

totally unjustifiable in terms of the notification dated

26.01.2006. Learned counsel would urge that the land in

question was agricultural land and fetched more value then

determined by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. The

learned counsel would submit that the matter may be

remanded to the reference Court for providing one more

opportunity to the claimant to lead his evidence.

4. The learned counsel would also place reliance

on the judgment of the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in

MFA No.102504/2016 and would submit that the claimant

would not claim interest on the compensation for the

period of delay caused on account of petitioner not leading

evidence.

5. This Court considered the submission as well

as judgement referred above.

6. The right to property is constitutional right as

guaranteed under Article 300(A) of the Constitution of

India. Whenever the properties of the citizens are

acquired by invoking the law applicable to the acquisition

of land, the person is entitled to compensation payable in

respect of the property in terms of the parameters set-out

in the law providing for acquisition of the property.

7. Under these circumstances it is noted that the

reference is required to adjudicate the claim relating to

just compensation payable for the property acquired.

This exercise is not carried out by the reference Court.

The learned counsel for the claimant would submits that in

the event of enhancement of the compensation by the

reference Court, the claimant will not claim interest on the

enhancement of the compensation in respect of the period

from the date of disposal of petition till the date of disposal

of this appeal. Under these circumstances, accepting the

submissions of the claimant this court is of the opinion that

the appeal is to be allowed in-part and the matter has to

be remanded to the reference Court for afresh adjudication

relating to the claim of the claimant seeking enhancement

of compensation. However, it is made clear that the

claimant is not entitled to the interest on the

compensation, if the compensation enhanced by the

reference Court from the date of disposal of the petition till

the date of disposal of this appeal.

                             ORDER


                a) The     judgement          and    award     dated
                  21.09.2011                passed       in     LAC

No.85/2009 by the Senior Civil Judge, Badami is set-aside and the matter is remanded back to the reference Court for determine the compensation payable in respect of the land, which

is the subject matter before the reference Court.

b) The   reference       Court     shall    provide
  opportunity       to     claimant        to   lead

evidence and thereafter determine the compensation payable in respect of the land acquired.

c) In the event of compensation being enhanced the claimant is not entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation from 21.09.2011 to 22.02.2022.

d) Registry is directed to refund the admissible Court fee to the claimant.

e) Registry is directed to send back the entire records to the reference Court.

f) The parties shall appear before the reference Court on 02.04.2022 without awaiting any notice from the reference Court. The reference Court to dispose of the reference within an outer limit of six months from the date referred to above. The parties to

proceedings shall co-operate for early disposal as stated above.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

hd