Karnataka High Court
Shivaraya S/O. Allappa vs The Spl Land Acquisition Officer on 5 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO.200065 OF 2016 (LAC)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201085 OF 2014(LAC)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201086 OF 2014(LAC)
IN MSA NO.200065/2016:
BETWEEN:
SMT. GANGAMMA
D/O BHIMAJI
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. DEODURGA,
DIST: RAICHUR.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed
by SWETA AND:
KULKARNI
Location: High
Court of SPL.LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
Karnataka
UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT,
DEODURGA
DIST: RAICHUR-584101.
...RESPONDENT
(SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG AND
SRI. G.B. YADAV, HCGP)
THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 54(2) OF LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COSTS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, RAICHUR (SITTING AT
ITINERATE COURT, DEVADURGA) IN LAC NO.31 OF 2011 AND
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
ALSO JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF I ADDL. DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, RAICHUR DATED: 20.02.2016 IN MA NO.38
OF 2015 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT THE RATE OF
RS.10,50,000/- PER ACRE AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS.
IN MFA NO.201085/2014:
BETWEEN:
SHIVARAYA
S/O ALLAPPA
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. DEODURGA,
DIST: RAICHUR-584101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT,
DEODURGA
DIST: RAICHUR-584101.
...RESPONDENT
(SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG AND
SRI. G.B. YADAV, HCGP)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 54(1) OF LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COSTS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
THE CIVIL JUDGE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT: RAICHUR
SITTING AT DEODURGA DATED:18.01.2014 IN LAC NO.36 OF
2011 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT THE RATE OF RS.8,00,000/-
PER ACRE AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS.
IN MFA NO.201086/2014:
BETWEEN:
SHIVARAYA S/O DODDA HANAMANTH
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
R/O. DEODURGA,
DIST: RAICHUR-584101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT,
DEODURGA
DIST: RAICHUR-584101.
...RESPONDENT
(SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG AND
SRI G.B. YADAV, HCGP)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 54(1) OF LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COSTS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT: RAICHUR SITTING AT
DEODURGA DATED:18.01.2014 IN LAC NO.33 OF 2011 AND
FIX MARKET VALUE AT THE RATE OF RS.8,00,000/- PER ACRE
AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
COMMON JUDGMENT
The Miscellaneous Second Appeal and Miscellaneous First
Appeals are taken up together for hearing as per the order of
this Court dated 03rd October, 2019.
Facts in MSA No.200065/2016:
This Second Appeal is preferred against judgment and
award dated 20th February, 2016 passed by the II Additional
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
District and Sessions Judge, Raichur in Miscellaneous Appeal
No.38 of 2015. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the
appellant was the owner of land bearing Sy.No.159/6
measuring 12 guntas situated at Devadurga. The said land was
acquired by the respondent vide preliminary notification dated
05th March, 2009 for the purpose of construction of NRBC
(UKP). The Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed an
award on 15th March, 2011 awarding compensation of
Rs.58,978/- for twelve guntas. Aggrieved by the said award,
the appellant sought reference before the Civil Court and on
reference, the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi
has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,01,500/- per acre. The
respondent has preferred an appeal against the same along
with an application seeking condonation of delay in preferring
the appeal. The first appellate Court has condoned the delay in
filing the appeal and modified the market value of the land of
the appellant/land loser and fixed it to Rs.1,95,000/- per acre.
Hence, this second appeal is filed by the appellant/land loser.
Facts in MFA Nos.201085/2014 and 201086/2014:
2. Both these appeals are preferred against the
judgment and award dated 18th January, 2014 passed by the
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Raichur sitting at Devadurga in
LAC Nos.33/2011 and 36/2011. Facts of the case of appellant
in MFA No.201085/2014 are that he was the owner of land
bearing Sy.No.336/2 measuring 32 guntas situated at
Devadurga, Raihcur District; and the appellant in MFA
No.201086/2014 was the owner of land bearing Sy.No.558/1
measuring 33 guntas situated at Devadruga, Raichur District.
Both lands were acquired by the respondent vide issuance of
preliminary notification dated 12th February, 2009 issued under
Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the purpose of
construction of NRBC Right bank canal. The SLAO has awarded
a compensation of Rs.1,37,681/- per acre. Aggrieved by the
said award, the appellants have sought reference to the Civil
Court. On reference, the learned Senior Civil Judge has
awarded a compensation of Rs.1,95,000/- per acre. Being
aggrieved by this judgment and award passed by the Reference
Court, the appellants have preferred these second appeals
before this Court.
3. Sri Harshavardhan R. Malipatil, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants has vehemently
submitted his argument that the land bearing Sy.No.159/6 of
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
Devadurga measuring 12 guntas pertaining to MSA
No.200065/2016 was acquired vide preliminary notification
dated 05th March, 2009. The SLAO has awarded an amount of
Rs.58,978/- for twelve guntas. Reference was made in LAC
No.31/2011 and as per the judgment dated 17th July, 2015, the
Reference Court has determined the market value of the
property at Rs.25,125/- per gunta. The Reference Court has
determined this market value on the basis of Exhibit P5 sale
deed pertaining to the lands situated at Devadurga, which is
sold for Rs.50,000/- for 1200 sq.ft.
3.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award
passed by the Reference Court, the Special Land Acquisiton
Officer preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Court in
Miscellaneous Appeal No.38/2015. The learned District Judge
has allowed the appeal modifying the award passed by the
Reference Court and determined the market value at
Rs.1,95,000/- per acre. Being aggrieved by this judgment and
award passed by the First Appellate Court, the appellants/land
losers have preferred these First Appeals.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
3.2. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits
that the Reference Court has rightly deducted 33% towards
development charges and has arrived at a market value of
Rs.33,500/- per gunta. Again the Reference Court has
deducted 1/4th of this amount on the ground that the land in
question is far away from the land stated in Exhibit P5. The
Reference Court has committed an error in giving double
deduction. Hence, he sought for compensation of Rs.33,500/-
per gunta.
3.3. It is the further submission of the learned counsel
for the appellants that the first appellate Court has committed
an error in relying on the decision in MSA No.1131/2013 C/w
MSA No.1132/2013 and MSA No.1133/2013 [Mallamma and
another, Hanumantha & another, Venkatesh respectively vs.
SLAO, UKP Amarapur Cross, Deodurga, Raichur] and this
judgment is not related to the lands involved in the case on
hand. The subject lands in above MSAs are situated in
Jinnapur, Devadurga taluk whereas the lands in question are
situated in Devadurga town/village. Therefore, the first
appellate Court has committed grave error in relying on the
decision in MSA No.1131/2013 and connected matters, which is
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
not related to the village/town of Devadurga. Though the SLAO
has not relied on this judgment, the first appellate Court has
suo moto referred the same to this case and reduced the
compensation determined by the Reference Court, which is
illegal and unsustainable under law.
3.4. Further he has submitted that the lands involved in
MFA No.201085/2014 and MFA No.201086/2014 situated in
Devadurga are acquired under the notification dated 05th
March, 2009 (gazette notification). The SLAO has passed
common award dated 15.03.2011. Hence, on the basis of the
above arguments he sought for same compensation in these
appeals also.
4. Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, the learned Additional
Advocate General along with Sri G.B. Yadav, the learned High
Court Government Pleader, vehemently submitted their
arguments that the Reference Court has mechanically passed
the impugned judgment in respect of MSA No.200065/2016
without any basis at the rate of Rs.25,125/- per gunta. The
land of the appellant is a dry land and is far away from the
village and fixation of market value basing upon Ex.P-5 - Sale
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
Deed is illegal and against the accepted principles of law. The
Reference Court ought to have considered that, in similar cases
in LAC No.37/2011 connected with LAC Nos.33 to 38 of 2011,
the market value is fixed at the rate of Rs.1,95,000/- per acre.
Considering all these aspects, the first Appellate Court has
rightly fixed the market value at Rs.1,95,000/- per acre. On all
these grounds, sought for dismissal of these appeals.
5. Having heard the arguments on both sides and on
perusal of the materials placed before this Court, the following
points would arise for my consideration:
In MSA No.200065/2016:
(i) Whether the first appellate Court has
committed an error in reducing the market
value from Rs.25,125/- per gunta to
Rs.1,95,000/- per acre to the land of the
appellant;
In MFA Nos.201085 & MFA No.201086/2014:
(ii) Whether the appellants are entitled for market
value as per the judgment and award passed
by the Reference Court in LAC No.31/2011 and
connected matters; and
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
(iii) What order or award?
Regarding Point No.1:
6. The first appellate Court has relied on the decision
of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MSA No.1131/2013
c/w MSAs No.1132/2013 and 1133/2013 [Mallamma and
another, Hanumanth and another and Venkatesh
respectively vs. SLAO] which are not related to the lands in
question. The subject lands in above MSAs are situated in
Jinapur village, Devadurga taluk, whereas the lands involved in
the present appeals are situated in Devadurga town. On
perusal of the judgment passed in MSA No.1131/2013 and
connected appeals, it is seen that the preliminary notification is
dated 12th August, 2010 and award was passed on 22nd
October, 2011. These lands are not situated in Devadurga
village. The land bearing Sy.No.159/6 of Devadurga town
measuring 12 guntas was acquired by the respondent vide
preliminary notification dated 05th March, 2009. On a careful
examination of the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court passed in MSA No.1131/2013 and connected appeals, it
is seen that this Court has determined the market value on
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
capitalization method. But for the lands in question involved in
MSA No.200065/2016, the reference Court has awarded the
compensation on the basis of sales statistics pertaining to
Devadurga village. Though the lands in question and lands
involved in MSA No.1131/2013 and connected appeals are
acquired by the respondent under different notifications and
situate in different villages, without any basis and without
assigning any proper reason, the first appellate Court has
determined the market value suo moto on the basis of
capitalization method and reduced the compensation to
Rs.1,95,000/- which is not sustainable under law.
7. At this juncture it is pertinent to refer to the
decision of KASTURI AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA
reported in AIR 2003 SC 202. In the said decision, their
Lordships have observed that it is well settled that in respect of
agriculture land or un-developed land which has potential value
for housing or commercial purpose, normally one-third of
compensation has to be deducted out of the amount of
compensation payable on the acquired land, subject to certain
variations depending upon its nature, location, extent of
expenditure involved for development and the area required for
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
roads and other civic amenities to develop the lands to make
plots for residential and commercial purpose.
8. In the case on hand, in paragraph 15 the Reference
Court, has assigned reasons. The same reads as under:
"15. As per the recitals of Ex.P.5 document,
the property involved in such sale deed measuring
1200 sq.ft. was sold out in the year 2007 for a sum
of Rs.50,000/-. Out of that total amount of
valuation 33% of the amont requires to be deducted
towards development charges as per the dictm laid
down by our own Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka
reported in ILR 1997 KAR 2063, which comes to
Rs.33,500/-. Sicne the acquried land is far away
from the Ex.P.5 property, the equal amount of
valuation cannot be awarded, hence, out of such
amount of Rs.33,500/- 1/4th amount requires to be
deducted, since Ex.P.5 property is not situated in
the same vicinity of the acquired land and remaining
amount of valuation can be applied to the land in
question. Therefore, the valuation of the acquired
land in my considered opinion comes to Rs.25,125/-
for 1200 sq.ft. The acquired land is measuring 12
guntas. Therefore, applying Rs.25,125/- per gunta
x 12 guntas = the amount value of the acquired
land comes to Rs.3,01,500/-, since the said
acquired land is non-agricultural land as on date of
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
acquisition. Therefore, the petitoner is entitled for
such amount of compensation with all statutory
benefits..."
9. The Reference Court also relied on the decision of
this Court in the case of THE ASSISTANT COMMISIONER v.
KEMALABAI KOM LAXMAN METRI reported in ILR 1997 KAR
2063. Considering the nature of land and locality, the
Reference Court has assessed the market value of the property
at the rate of Rs.25,125/- per gunta, which is in accordance
with law and facts and also based on the decisions of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court.
10. The First Appellate Court has not properly
appreciated the evidence on record in accordance with law and
facts and reduced the compensation awarded by the Reference
Court, which is not sustainable under law. Accordingly, I
answer point No.1 in the affirmative.
Regarding Point No.2:
11. This Court has set aside the judgment and award
dated 20th February, 2016 passed in Miscellaneous Appeal
No.38 of 2015 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge,
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
Raichur and upheld the judgment and award dated 17th July,
2015 passed in LAC No.31 of 2011 by the Reference Court. The
land bearing Survey No.336/2 and the land bearing survey
No.558/1 of Devadurga village, pertaining to Miscellaneous First
Appeals No.201085 and 201086 of 2014 situate in the same
village and are acquired by the respondents under same
notification dated 24th February, 2009; whereas, the land
involved in Miscellaneous Second Appeal No.200065 of 2016 is
acquired under Preliminary Notification dated 05th March, 2009
issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
There is only nine days gap between the two notifications and
the Special Land Acquisition Officer has passed common award
dated 15th March, 2011. Since the land involved in
Miscellaneous First Appeals No.201085 and 201086 of 2014 and
the lands involved in Miscellaneous Second Appeal No.200065
of 2016 are acquired by the respondents, situate in the villages
which are adjacent to each other and are acquired for the same
purpose with a gap of nine days in issuing preliminary
notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, it is just and proper to award compensation of
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
MSA No. 200065 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 201085 of 2014
MFA No. 201086 of 2014
Rs.25,125/- per gunta to the land involved in these appeals.
Accordingly, I answer point No.2 in the affirmative.
Regarding Point No.3:
12. For the aforesaid reasons and discussions, I proceed
to pass the following:
ORDER
1. Miscellaneous Second Appeal No200065 of 2016 is
partly allowed;
2. The judgment and award dated 20th February, 2016
passed in MA 38 of 2015 by the III Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Raichur is set aside;
3. The judgment and award dated 17th July, 2015
passed in LAC No.31 of 2011 passed by the
Additional Senior Civil Judge, Raichur sitting at
Itinerary Court at Devadurga, is confirmed keeping in
mind the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of ALI MOHAMMED v. STATE OF JAMMU AND
KASHMIR reported in AIR 2017 SC 1518;
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2868
4. Miscellaneous Second Appeals No.201085 of 2014
and 201086 of 2014 are allowed in part with costs;
5. Judgment and award dated 18th January, 2014 in LAC
No.33 of 2011 and 36 of 2011 passed by the
Additional Senior Civil Judge and Raichur sitting at
Itinerary Court at Devadurga are modified holding
that the claimants are entitled for the compensation
of Rs.25,125/- per gunta, with all statutory benefits;
6. Appellants to pay deficit court fee and file fresh
valuation slipwithin a period eight weeks;
7. Registry to draw separate award accordingly;
8. Send the copy of this judgment and award along with
Trial Court Records to the concerned Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SWK,LNN
