Karnataka High Court
Sri Puttaswamy vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 9 February, 2024
Author: H.P.Sandesh
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:5609
MFA No. 7992 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7992 OF 2017 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI PUTTASWAMY
S/O LATE SANNAIAH
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
NO.3500, NARIKAL ROAD,
ERANAGERE, N.R.MOHALLA,
MYSORE-570 007.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. G. BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
MYSORE SUB-DIVSIION,
MYSORE-570 021.
Digitally signed
by SHARANYA T ...RESPONDENT
Location: HIGH (BY SMT. M.V.ADHITI, HCGP)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAC ACT,
1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED
07.09.2016, PASSED IN LAC. NO.172/2002, ON THE FILE OF
THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE CJM, MYUSRU,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:5609
MFA No. 7992 of 2017
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned
HCGP for the respondent.
2. This miscellaneous first appeal is filed challenging
the order passed by the Trial Court in LAC No.172/2002 dated
07.09.2016 on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge
and CJM, Mysuru, wherein in respect of acquisition of the
property by the respondent, compensation of Rs.5,94,000/- is
awarded with other statutory benefits.
3. The main contention of the learned counsel for the
appellant is that the award passed by the Trial Court is very
less and meager. The counsel also would submit that this Court
in M.F.A.NO.1701/2012 C/W. M.F.A.NO.7566/2010 dated
24.07.2014 in respect of Sy.No.466/3 of Kesare Village,
enhanced the compensation to the tune of Rs.15,73,000/- per
acre with other statutory benefits.
4. The counsel would further submit that the land
which was acquired in the said case pertains to the notification
of the year 1992 and the present acquisition was in the year
1997 i.e., after lapse of 5 years. The counsel would contend
NC: 2024:KHC:5609
that taking note of the said notification, the present appellant is
also entitled for higher amount. Learned counsel also would
submit that the preliminary notification in respect of the
present acquisition was issued on 24.11.1997 and final
notification was issued on 26.09.1998 and when the properties
are similar in nature and the acquisition is for public purpose,
the appellant is also entitled for compensation as per the
judgment of this Court referred supra. The counsel has also
placed the said judgment in M.F.A.NO.1701/2012 C/W.
M.F.A.NO.7566/2010 dated 24.07.2014 before this Court
dated. Apart from that, counsel would contend that there are
22 guntas of land, including 5 guntas of karab land and
compensation awarded is only for 17 guntas and the appellant
is also entitled for 5 guntas of karab land. Hence, this Court
also can consider awarding compensation for karab land.
5. Per contra, learned HCGP for the respondent would
submit that though the property is situated in Kesare Village,
the Trial Court has also taken note of the document at Ex.P4 in
respect of Sy.Nos.487/1 and 490/3 and based on the same,
compensation is determined to the tune of Rs.5,94,000/-. She
also would submit that present acquisition is for the purpose of
NC: 2024:KHC:5609
sewage pipeline and other notification which the learned
counsel for the appellant is relying upon is for construction of
residential layout in Devanuru II Stage and hence, the same
cannot be considered.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant
and learned HCGP for the respondent and also taking note of
the fact that compensation awarded is Rs.15,73,000/- is in
respect of the notification of the year 1992 and the present
acquisition was made in the year 1997, there is a force in the
contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the
present acquisition is after lapse of five years and having
considered the purpose of acquisition i.e., for formation of
layout in respect of earlier acquisition and present acquisition is
for laying sewerage pipeline and both are for public purpose,
the very contention of the learned HCGP for the respondent
cannot be accepted, since both the properties are similar in
nature.
7. I have already pointed out that in view of the earlier
notification of 1992, this Court in M.F.A.NO.1701/2012 C/W.
M.F.A.NO.7566/2010 dated 24.07.2014 has determined the
NC: 2024:KHC:5609
compensation of Rs.15,73,000/- and present notification is of
the year 1997 i.e., after lapse of five years. Having considered
the purpose for which the land was acquired by the
Government, it is appropriate to consider the judgment of this
Court in M.F.A.NO.1701/2012 C/W. M.F.A.NO.7566/2010
dated 24.07.2014 and the appellant is also entitled for
compensation of Rs.15,73,000/- per acre as the land is also
similar and within the same village.
8. The other contention of the learned counsel for the
appellant is that the appellant is also entitled for compensation
in respect of 5 guntas of karab land and no document is
produced as to whether the same is a Government karab or
private karab. Hence, in the absence of any material, the
question of considering the same sitting in the appeal does not
arise without raising the said issue in the Trail Court and no
marital to that effect and I do not find any force in the
contention of the learned counsel for the appellant to award
compensation in respect of 5 guntas of karab land. Therefore,
the prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant is turned
down.
NC: 2024:KHC:5609
9. In view of the discussion made above, I pass the
following:
(i) The appeal is allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and decree in LAC
No.172/2002 dated 07.09.2016 on the file of
the III Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM,
Mysuru, is hereby modified fixing the rate of
compensation at Rs.15,73,000/- per acre as
against Rs.5,94,000/- per acre with all other
statutory benefits.
Sd/-
JUDGE
ST
