Karnataka High Court
Sri.Dastagirsab S/O Abdulsab ... vs The Special Land Acquisition ... on 7 June, 2022
Bench: Sreenivas Harish Kumar, S Rachaiah
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF JUNE 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. RACHAIAH
MFA.CROB.No.200076/2016 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. DASTAGIRSAB S/O ABDULSAB NAGARDINNI
AGE: MAJOR OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O: UKKALLI VILLAGE
TQ: BASAVANA BAGEWADI
DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586 101. ...CROSS-OBJECTOR
(BY SRI. MANVENDRA REDDY AND SRI. NARENDRA M.
REDDY, ADVOCATES)
AND:
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
VIJAYAPUR-586 101. ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. J. SATISH KUMAR, AGA)
THIS MFA.CROB IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54 (1) OF
THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1896 PRAYING TO CALL FOR
THE RECORDS AND TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 27.09.2014 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, BASAVANA BAGEWADI IN LAC.NO.90/2012 AND RE-
DETERMINE THE MARKET VALUE WITH ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS AND COST. FURTHER THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT IN MFA.NO.200544/2016 MAY
KINDLY BE DISMISSED AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER
OR ORDERS AS THIS COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE.
THIS MFA.CROB IS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri. Manvendra Reddy, the learned counsel
for the cross-objector and Sri. J. Satish Kumar, the
learned Additional Government Advocate for the
respondent.
02. The only grievance of the cross-objector is that
the reference Court failed to award any amount of
compensation to the house that existed in the acquired
land.
03. Sri. Manvendra Reddy, the learned counsel for
the cross-objector submits that the cross-objector
produced Ex.P.26 - valuation sheet according to which the
house was valued at Rs.4,28,596/-. Over and above this
amount 50% should have been added for granting
compensation for acquisition of house.
04. The learned Additional Government Advocate
opposes awarding any further amount, because according
to him whatever the reference Court has granted is just
and proper.
05. The land measuring 01 acre 16 guntas in
Sy.No.863/3B of Ukkalli village Tq: Basavan Bagewadi
Dist: Vijayapura belonging to the cross-objector was
acquired by notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act dated 06.05.2010. Against the award
passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the
reference Court enhanced the compensation for the land
to Rs.10,95,246/- per acre. There is no dispute that there
existed a house in the acquired land. In fact the reference
Court has noted the existence of the house, but while
awarding compensation, did not award any amount for the
house, all though the cross-objector produced Ex.P.26 -
valuation sheet of the house. Therefore, we find that the
reference Court has committed a mistake in not awarding
any amount to the house.
06. As per Ex.P.26 the valuation of the house is
Rs.4,28,596/-. In MFA.No.4206/2002 the Coordinate
Bench of this Court has held that awarding 50% over and
above the valuation is not incorrect. In
MFA.No.30396/2011 also it is observed that in regard to
building, if the value is not established by producing any
proof, conventionally 50% over and above the value
assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer could be
considered. In this case the Land Acquisition Officer
assessed the value of the house at Rs.4,28,596/-. That
means even if Ex.P.26 is ignored, 50% can be added to
valuation made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.
Here Ex.P.26 is not disputed by the learned Additional
Government Advocate and in this view we can add 50% to
Rs.4,28,596/-. Therefore, the total amount comes to
Rs.4,28,596/- + 50% (Rs.2,14,298/-) = Rs.6,42,894/-.
07. In this view the cross-objector succeeds. We
award an amount of Rs.6,42,894/- to the cross-objector
for the house along with other statutory benefits and
interest.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
KJJ
