The Executive Engineer vs Shimoga Urban Development ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 3603 Kant

                            1




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                        PRESENT

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

                           AND

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT

     MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL .No.2998 OF 2012(LAC)


BETWEEN:

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
UPPER TUNGA PROJECT,
SHIMOGA .                                 ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. PRASHANTH, FOR
 SRI. R. SHARATH CHANDRA, ADVOCATES)

AND:

1.      SHIMOGA URBAN DEVELOPMENT
        AUTHORITY (SUDA),
        SHIMOGA.

2.      THE SPL LAO.,
        UPPER TUNGA PROJECT,
        SHIMOGA.                        ...RESPONDENTS



(BY SRI. A.V. GANGADHARAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
 BY SRI. RAMESH GOWDA.A, AGA FOR R2)


      THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL FILED U/S
54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.09.2011 PASSED IN
LAC.NO.25/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CJM, SHIVAMOGGA, PARTLY
                            2




ALLOWING THE REFERENCE         PETITION   FOR   ENHANCED
COMPENSATION.


     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:

                      JUDGMENT

Shri A.V. Gangadharappa, learned advocate

for respondent No.1 submits that the impugned

judgment and award was the subject matter of MFA

No.6930/2016. The said appeal has been disposed

of on 03.02.2021 fixing the compensation at the

rate of 150/- per square feet. The appellant herein

was a party in the said appeal.

2. The submission of Shri. Gangadharappa,

is not disputed by Shri. Prashanth, learned

advocate for the appellant. However, he submits

that this Court has to consider paragraph No.16 of

the appeal memorandum by contending that the

award has been passed in phases and same is not

maintainable and this question of law requires

consideration.

3. In view of the fact that the impugned

judgment and award has been considered in the

aforementioned M.F.A No.6930/2016 and

enhancement has been ordered, we dispose of the

appeal reserving liberty to the appellant to raise

contentions of law urged in this appeal, in any

appropriate case.

4. In view of disposal of the appeal,

I.A.No.2/2012 does not survive for consideration

and the same stands disposed of.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

MBM