Karnataka High Court

The Deputy Chief Engineer vs The Assistant Commissioner on 22 June, 2022

Bench: Pradeep Singh Bypsyj

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 22ST DAY OF JUNE 2022

                        BEFORE

   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

              M.F.A. NO.101368/2021 (LAC)
BETWEEN:

   THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
   CONSTRUCTION-II
   SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY
   HUBBALLI-580023, DHARWAD
                                          ...APPELLANT
       (By Sri: MALLIKARJUN S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:

1 . THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
    AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
    DHARWAD-580001

2 . SHEKAPPA S/O. BASAPPA BADNI
    AGE. MAJOR,
    OCC. NOT KNOWN,
    R/O. KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580023

3 . BASAVARAJ S/O BASAPPA BADNI
    AGE. 60 YEARS,
    OCC AGRICULTURE,HUBBALLI

4 . SHANKAREPPA S/O. BASAPPA BADNI
    AGE. 55 YEARS,
    OCC AGRICULTURE,
    KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580023
                                      ...RESPONDENTS
       (By Sri: VINAYAK D.NARGUND, ADV. FOR R2 TO R4)

                          ***
                                          2


     MFA FILED U/SEC.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION
ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD
29.02.2020 PASSED IN LAC.NO.10/2012 ON THE FILE OF
THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HUBBALLI,
AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.95,700/- PER
GUNTA.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
APPICATION THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:


                                    JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred by the beneficiary

challenging the Judgment and Award dated 29.02.2020

passed by II Addl. Senior Civil Judge at Hubballi (for short

'the reference Court') in LAC.No.10/2012 to the extent

that it has awarded exorbitant compensation of

Rs.95,700/- per gunta along with statutory benefits. This

appeal is founded on the premise of exorbitant

compensation awarded by the reference Court.

2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as

per their status before the reference Court.

3. Brief facts of the case is as under:

The appellant herein, the beneficiary, with an

intention to lay a new railway line between Hubli and

Hebasur requested the 1st respondent/ S.L.A.O. to acquire

the land. Accordingly, 1st respondent issued notification

under Section 4(1) and 17 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(hereafter referred to as 'Act' for brevity). The possession

of land in question was taken on 22.07.2010. Land of

respondent/claimant No.1 is an agricultural land situated

at Bammapur village in RS No.86/1 measuring 14 guntas.

The 1st respondent passed award on 30.11.2010 fixing the

market value at Rs.2,788/- per gunta after taking into

consideration the value of land acquired and after

collecting the sales statistics from the office of Sub-

Registrar, Hubli with regard to nearby acquired lands and

thereby came to a conclusion in fixing the market value of

acquired land. The total land acquired in RS No.86/1 is 14

guntas and the said lands of the claimants are agricultural

lands.

4. The claimant was not satisfied with the award

passed by the 1st respondent hence he filed reference

petition under Section 18 of the Act with a prayer to

enhance the market value of the acquired lands. The

reference Court issued notice to the respondents and on

receipt of such notice appellant appeared through counsel

and filed detailed statement of objection to the claim

petition filed by the claimant inter alia contending that the

claim petition is not maintainable and the amount sought

for in the claim petition is excessive and the same is not

entitled to be granted to the claimant. It was further

pleaded that the 1st respondent-S.L.A.O. personally

inspected the land acquired and after taking into

consideration all attending circumstances as explained in

the award to determine the market value of the land

acquired which is legal valid and no mala fides can be

attributed. It is further stated that the market value fixed

on the basis of sale of similar lands during relevant period

is proper accordingly sought for rejection of claim petition.

After hearing all the parties concerned, the reference

Court determined the market value of land fixed the value

of he land from Rs. 2,788/- per gunta to Rs.87,000/- per

gunta and also granted statutory benefits. The Reference

Court following the Judgment and Award passed in LAC

No.52 to 58 of 2010 also awarded 10% appreciation and

fixed the market value at Rs.95,700/- per gunta. It is

submitted that appellant had questioned the said

Judgment and Award passed in LAC No.52 to 58 of 2010

before this Court in MFA Nos.23747 to 23752 of 2013

(LAC) before the Division Bench of this Court which came

to be partly allowed and the compensation came to be

reduced marginally to Rs.75,000/- per gunta as against

Rs.87,000/- per gunta passed by the reference Court.

5. This Court would not want to go into elaborate

discussions on facts and legal questions involved in the

matter as the subject matter of the present appeal has

already been decided by a Division Bench of this Court

vide order dated 23.06.2020 in MFA No. 23749 of 2013

(LAC) connected with MFA CROB No. 909 of 2013, wherein

the beneficiaries as well as the land losers were before the

Division Bench of this Court aggrieved by the

compensation awarded by the reference Court. The

subject matter in the present appeal is the same as the

one already decided by the Division Bench of this

Court in the aforesaid appeals, wherein award of

reference Court granting compensation of Rs.87,000/-

per gunta has been reduced to Rs.75,000/- per gunta

(deleted) *(per gunta) with all statutory benefits including interest and

cost as admissible under the Act.

6. It would be a futile exercise by this Court to go

into details of the matter as the learned counsel for the

appellant seeks to allow the appeal on the basis of the

Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in

MFA.No.23749/2013 (LAC) connected with

MFA.CROB.No.909/2013 dated 23.06.2020 which arise out

of the very same notification and award and also pertains

to the very same project-doubling the railway lane from

Hubballi-Hebsur.

7. Accordingly, I pass the following :

ORDER

(i) Appeal is allowed in part.

(ii) The Judgment and award dated

29.02.2020 in LAC.No.10/2012 passed

by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge,

Hubballi is modified by reducing the

compensation amount to Rs.75,000/-

per gunta with all statutory benefits * Corrected & deleted vide order dated 12.07.2022.

          Sd/
  (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)



        including     interest        and       costs   as

admissible under the Act as against

Rs.95,700/- per gunta awarded by the

reference Court.

(iii) Further, claimant - respondent shall

also entitled to 10% of the escalation in

the market value for the period from

07.11.2009 to 22.07.2010;

(iv) Learned counsel for the appellant

contends that he ought to have paid

Court fee of Rs.27,790/-, whereas he

has paid total Court fee of Rs.74,195/-.

        The   award      in     question        challenged

        before this Court is to an extent of

        Rs.20,700/-      per        gunta.      Therefore,

        excess Court fee is paid. In view of

        disposal    of       this     appeal      at    the

preliminary stage itself, learned counsel

has filed a memo seeking refund of

Court fee in accordance to Section 66C

of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits

Valuation Act, 1958.;

(v) Since the matter is disposed of at the

preliminary stage itself and has not

proceeded further, the appellant is

entitled to refund of Court fee as

admissible.;

(vi) Registry to verify the same and

accordingly refund admissible Court fee