Karnataka High Court

Sangappa S/O Ravoutappa Gundagi vs The Chief Engineer Id Ipc Ors on 19 April, 2024

                                              -1-
                                                    NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097
                                                       MSA No. 556 of 2010




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                           DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

                                           BEFORE

                           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

                            MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO.556 OF 2010

                   BETWEEN:

                   SANGAPPA S/O RAVOUTAPPA GUNDAGI
                   AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRICFULTURE
                   R/O: NIMBARGA VILLAGE,
                   TQ: ALAND, DIST: GULBARGA.
                                                              ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. SANTOSH KUMAR MARADI, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   THE CHIEF ENGINEER ID IPC
                        ZONE, GULBARGA.

                   2.   THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                        KNNL BHIMA LIFT IRRIGATION
Digitally signed        DIVISION AFZALPUR, DIST GULBARGA.
by RAMESH
MATHAPATI
Location: High     3.   THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICE
Court of
Karnataka               M & MIP, GULBARGA.

                                                           ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI. SUDARSHAN M. ADV. FOR R1 AND R2;
                       SRI. G.B. YADAV-HCGP FOR R3)

                        THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 54(2) OF LAND
                   ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
                   AWARD DATED: 29.06.2010 IN LACA NO. 101/2007 PASSED BY
                   THE I ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AT GULBARGA AND DECREE
                   DATED 01.12.2006 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN)
                   ALAND IN LAC NO.33/2006 PLEASED TO MODIFY BY ALLOWING
                                   -2-
                                          NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097
                                                 MSA No. 556 of 2010




THIS APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION OF
RS.1,00,000/- PER ACRE TO 1,64,385/- PER ACRE FOR
IRRIGATED LAND OF THE APPELLANT WITH ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS AND ETC.

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

                              JUDGMENT

The appellant has preferred this appeal against the award

dated 29th June, 2010 passed by the First Additional District and

Sessions Judge Gulbarga in LACA No.101 of 2007 seeking for

enhancement of compensation.

2. Brief facts of the case that lead to the filing of this

appeal are that the appellant is the owner of the land bearing

Survey No.278/2 measuring 2 acre 09 guntas of wet land of

Nimbarga village, Aland Taluk, Gulbarga District. The

respondent has issued preliminary notification dated 16th May,

2002 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for

acquisition of land of the appellant for construction of Left Canal

Amarja Project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,

determined the market value of the land at Rs.41,400/- per

acre of wet land. Upon reference, the Reference Court awarded

compensation of Rs.77,000/- per acre of wet land. Being

dissatisfied with the award passed by the Reference Court, the

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

appellant has preferred the appeal before the First Appellate

Court, and the First Appellate Court has partly allowed the

appeal and awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre

with all statutory benefits. Being not satisfied with the

compensation arrived at by the First Appellate Court, the

appellant is before this Court in this second appeal seeking

enhancement of compensation.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits

that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of GANESH

v. THE STATE THROUGH SLAO AND ANOTHER rendered in MSA

No.1055 of 2013 disposed of on 17th September, 2021,

awarded the compensation of Rs.2,27,090/- per acre with all

statutory benefits pertaining to land in survey No.639/2 and

639/A, Aa measuring 10 acre 25 guntas situate at Aland Taluk,

Kalaburagi District which land was acquired for Amarja project

vide issuance of preliminary notification dated 17th January,

1991. The Respondent, Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited,

has challenged the said judgment and award dated 17th

September, 2021 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special

Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.5159 of 2023. The said Special

Leave Petition came to be dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

Court on 20th November, 2023. The land involved in MSA

No.1055 of 2013 (supra) which was acquired by preliminary

notification dated 17th January, 1991 situate in Aland Taluk of

Kalaburagi District and the land involved in this appeal also

situate in Aland Taluk and acquired by the respondents for the

same project which is acquired vide preliminary notification

dated 16th May, 2002. There is a gap of 11 year, 3 month and

29 days between the notification issued in MSA No.1055 of

2013 and the notification dated 16th May, 2002. Hence, in view

of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of THE

CENTRAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION V. THAKUR DWARA

KALAN UL-MARUF BARAGLAN WALA (DEAD) & ORS. rendered in

Civil Appeals arising out of Special Leave Petitions (C)

No.30817-30818 of 2016 dated 19th October, 2023, 8%

escalation has to be added for 11 year, 3 month and 29 days

and if the compensation is calculated after adding escalation at

the rate of 8% per year, for 11 year, 3 month, 29 days, it

comes to Rs.1,99,939/- per acre. Hence, Rs.1,99,939/- +

Rs.2,26,990/- comes to Rs.4,26,929/-. Accordingly, the

appellant is entitled for compensation with all statutory

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

benefits. To substantiate his argument he has also relied upon

the decision of following cases:

1. SHIVAPPA ETC. ETC. v. THE CHIEF ENGINEER AND OTHERS - (CIVIL APPEALS ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.2785-2791 of 2019;

2. K. SUBBARAYUDU AND OTHERS v. SPECIAL DEPTY CLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION) - 2017 LAC 561 SC;

3. DHIRAJ SINGH (D) Tr. v. HARYANA STATE -

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.6599-6601 OF 2014 ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NOS.22139-22141 OF 2012 AND OTHER CONNECTED APPEALS;

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel Sri Sudarshan

M, appearing for respondent-KNNL and Sri Gopalakrishna B.

Yadav, learned High Court Government Pleader, jointly

submitted that the land involved in the present appeal is

acquired in the year 2002 and the decision relied upon by the

learned counsel for the appellant in MSA No.1055 of 2013 is

pertaining the land acquired in the year 1991 and hence, the

same cannot be considered. They further submit that the

Division Bench of this Court has passed an award in

Miscellaneous First Appeal No.31613 of 2012 and 19 other

cases with Cross Objections No.200042 of 2014 has awarded

compensation of Rs.4,15,000/- per acre along with statutory

benefits which pertains to the notification issued in the year

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

2006 for the lands situated in Afzalpur Taluk, Kalaburagi

District. The learned counsel submit that on the basis of the

said judgment, this Court has to de-escalate at the rate of 8%

per annum and award the compensation. To buttress their

submission, reliance is also placed on the decision of Division

Bench of this Court in the case of REVANASIDDAPPA AND

OTHERS v. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, KNNL AND OTHERS rendered

in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.32599 of 2013 decided on 01st

June, 2020 wherein the compensation was determined at

Rs.2,77,000/- per acre with statutory benefits and costs.

5. By way of reply, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant submitted that one of the appellants Shivappa, who

was party in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.31613 of 2012 and

19 other cases, preferred Special Leave Petition before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeals arising of SLP (C)

Nos.2785-2791 of 2019 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide

order dated 11th April, 2023, granted compensation at

Rs.4,61,250/- per acre with all statutory benefits. He submits

that the Preliminary Notification in the said case is pertaining to

the year 2006 and therefore, it is not just and proper to award

compensation on the basis of the award passed by the Hon'ble

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

Division Bench of this Court in Miscellaneous First Appeal

No.31613 of 2012 and 19 other connected cases, which is

partly allowed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeals

arising out of Special Leave Petitions No.2785-2791 of 2019. In

view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case

of K. SUBBARAYUDU AND OTHERS v. SPECIAL DEPUTY

COLLECTOR, (LAND ACQUISITION) (supa) wherein it is held

that since the appellant/claimants therein are agriculturists

whose lands were acquired for the same project are given

higher compensation, there is no reason to decline the same to

the similarly situated agriculturists. He also submits that

merely on the ground of delay, such benefit cannot be denied to

the appellants.

6. Sri Sudarshan M, learned counsel for KNNL submits

that KNNL has filed Review petition before Hon'ble Supreme

Court in RP Diary No.37647 of 2023 in Special Leave Petition

No.2694 of 2023 and the same is pending till day.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. This Court

has carefully examined the material placed by to the parties.

The learned counsel for the appellant mainly relied upon the

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

decision of this Court in MSA No.1055 of 2013 (supra), which is

confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP (Civil) Diary

No.5159 of 2013 vide order dated 20th November, 2023.. The

land involved in MSA No.1055 of 2013 is Survey No.639/2 and

639/A, Aa measuring 10 acre 25 guntas situate at Aland Taluk,

Kalaburagi District, which was acquired by respondents vide

preliminary notification dated 17th January, 1991 and the award

came to be passed on 30th August, 1993 determining the

market value at Rs.20,000/- per acre of dry land. In view of

the judgment of this Court, the market value of the land in

question is determined at the rate of Rs.2,27,090 per acre of

wet land with all statutory benefits. This judgment is confirmed

by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition

No.5159 of 2023. In the said case, the land situate in Aland

Taluk Kalaburagi District is acquired by the respondents for the

purpose of Amarja project under preliminary notification dated

16th May, 2002. In the case on hand, the land in question

situate in Nimbarga village of Aland Taluk Kalaburagi District

which is also acquired for the same poject. The Special Land

Acquisition Officer has fixed the market value at Rs.41,400/-

per acre of wet land. The Reference Court enhanced awarded

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

the compensation at Rs.70,000/- per acre and the First

Appellate Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,00,000/-

per acre of wet land with all statutory benefits. The lands

involved in MSA No.1055 of 2013 situate in Aland Taluk are

acquired for Amarja project vide preliminary notification dated

17th January, 1991. This court has noticed through internet

that Aland and Nimbarga are approximately at a distance of 23

kilometers. The lands in both the cases are acquired for Amarja

Project. There is a gap of 11 year, 3 month and 29 days

between the two preliminary notifications, i.e. one is issued on

17thJanuary 1991 and the other is issued on 16th May, 2002.

The Preliminary Notification involved in MSA No.1055 of 2013 is

17th January, 1991. Relying on the decision of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of CENTRAL WAREHOUSING

CORPORATION (supra), if this court adds escalation at 8% per

year, for 11 year, 3 month and 29 days it comes to

Rs.1,99,839/- and if it is added to Rs.2,27,090/- as awarded in

MSA No.1055 of 2013, it comes to Rs.4,26,929/- per acre. If

this Court calculates the amount on the basis of award passed

by the Hon'ble Supeme Court in Civil Appeal No.2785-2791 of

2019, in the case of SHIVAPPA (supra), at Rs.4,61,250/- per

- 10 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

acre which pertains to notification of the year 2006, this Court

has to de-escalate at the rate of 5% as calculated in MSA

No.1055 of 2013. Then it comes to Rs.92,250/- and if the

same is deducted from Rs.4,61,250/-, the compensation comes

to Rs.3,69,000/- per acre.

8. At this stage, it is appropriate to mention the decision

of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K. SUBBARAYUDU

AND OTHERS (supra), wherein at paragraph 14 of the

judgment, it is observed as under:

"14. When the concerned Court has exercised its discretion either condoning of declining to condone the delay, normally the superior Court will not interfere in exercise of such discretion. The true guide is whether the litigant has acted with due diligence. Since the appellants/claimants are the agriculturists whose lands were acquired and when similar situated agriculturists were given a higher rate of compensation, there is no reason to decline the same to the appellants. Merely on the ground of delay such benefit cannot be denied to the appellants. The interest of justice would be served by declining the interest on the enhanced compensation and also on the solatium and other statutory benefits for the period of delay"

(emphasis supplied)

- 11 -

NC: 2024:KHC-K:3097

9. Keeping in mind the decision relied upon by the

learned counsel appearing for the parties and the location and

distance of lands acquired for the project by both the

Notifications, so also, the gap of 11 year 3 month and 29 days

between two notifications, it is just and proper to award

compensation at Rs.3,80,000/- per acre of wet land with all

statutory benefits.

10. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

1. Appeal is allowed in part with proportionate costs;

2. The judgment and award dated 29th June, 2010

passed in LACA NO. 101 of 2007 by the i Additional

District Judge and Gulbarga, is modified by

enhancing the compensation to Rs.3,80,000/-per

acre of wet land with all statutory benefits;

3. It is also made clear that as per the Order of this

Court dated 15th March, 2024, the appellant is not

entitled for any interest for the delayed period for

3544 days in filing the appeal before this Court, so