Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs The Special Land Acquisition ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 13201 Kant

                            1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                    DHARWAD BENCH

         DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2019

                         BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD

                M.S.A. NO.100053/2017(LA)

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD.,
REP.BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KNNL
MLBC DIVISION NO.2, NAVILTIRTH,
TALUK: SAUNDATTI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
                                            -   APPELLANT
(BY SRI.G.K.HIREGOUDAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
       M.P.3, DHARWAD-580 001.

2.     SHRI.VENKAPPA,
       S/O HANAMAPPA KALWAD,
       AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O HOOLI VILLAGE OF
       SAUNDATTI TALUK,
       DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.

3.     SHRI.DHARMAPPA,
       S/O HANAMAPPA KALWAD,
       AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
       R/O HOOLI VILLAGE OF
       SAUNDATTI TALUK,
                               2




     DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.

4.   SHRI.VENKAPPA,
     S/O LAXMAPPA SOTNAL,
     AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O HOOLI VILLAGE OF
     SAUNDATTI TALUK,
     DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.

5.   SHRI.ANAND S/O BASAPPA SOTNAL,
     AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O HOOLI VILLAGE OF
     SAUNDATTI TALUK,
     DIST: BELAGAVI-590001.
                                      -    RESPONDENTS

     THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF LAND

ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE

DATED 09.06.2016 PASSED IN LACA.NO.136/2015 ON THE FILE

OF THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE,

BELAGAVI, DISMISSING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED

18.12.2014 PASSED IN LAC NO.55/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE

PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 18(1) OF LA ACT.


     THIS APPEAL COMING ON ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT

DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                3




                           ORDER

Though sufficient opportunities are given the office

objections are not complied. It is obvious that the appellant

is not interested in prosecuting the case. Hence, the appeal is

dismissed for non-compliance of office objections.

SD/-

JUDGE bvv