Karnataka High Court
Smt.Kadli Kotramma W/O Late ... vs The Secretary on 15 February, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3597
WP No. 113033 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
WRIT PETITION NO. 113033 OF 2019 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.KADLI KOTRAMMA
W/O LATE KOTRABASAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS
KADLI VEERANNA S/O LATE KADLI
KOTRABASAPPA
AGED: 68 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O WARD NO.3 DOOR NO.719,
UJJANI ROAD, KOTTUR,
TQ: KOTTUR,
DIST:BALLARI 581301.
SUJATA
SUBHASH
2. K.VEERABHADRAPPA S/O LATE
PAMMAR
KOTRABASAPPA
AGED 58 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O WARD NO.3 DOOR NO.719,
UJJANI ROAD, KOTTUR,
TQ:KOTTUR, DIST:BALLARI 581301.
3. K.GURUBASAVARAJ S/O LATE KOTRABASAPPA
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3597
WP No. 113033 of 2019
AGED 48 YEARS,
OCC:AGRICULTURE,
R/O WARD NO.3 DOOR NO.719,
UJJANI ROAD, KOTTUR,
TQ:KOTTUR, DIST:BALLARI 581301.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SMT. VIDYAWATI KOTTURSHETTAR FOR
SRI. SADIQ N GOODWALA)
AND:
1. THE SECRETARY
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
M.S.BUILDING,
BENGALURU 560001.
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION)
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
NO 18, MILERS ROAD,
BENGALURU 560001.
3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
(CONSTRUCTION)
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
YADHAVAGIRI, MYSORE-20
NOW AT HUBBALLI 580025.
4. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
(CONSTRUCTION),
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
KOTTUR HARIHARA RAILWAY,
BROADGAGUGE LANE,
DAVANAGERE - 583131.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3597
WP No. 113033 of 2019
5. THE SPL, LAND ACQUISITION OFFICE,
KOTTUR-HARIHARA RAILWAY,
BROADGAGUE LINE YOGAJE,
GODIKERE,
TQ:HARAPANAHALLI,
DIST:DAVANAGERI 583131
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HANAMANTRAYA LAGALI - AGA FOR R1 & R5;
SRI AJAY U PATIL FOR R2 - R4;
SRI. MALLIKARJUN S HIREMATH FOR R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, A) ISSUE A WRIT IN
THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE ORDER
OR DIRECTION, DIRECTING THE COURT BELOW TO MODIFY HE
JUDGMENT AND DIRECTING THEM TO PAY THE INTEREST FROM THE
DATE OF U/S4(1) NOTIFICATION OF THE LAND ACQUITION ACT,
1894 AND TILL DEPOSIT OF ENTIRE AMOUNT BY THE RESPONDENT
WITH OTHER STATUTORY BENEFITS ACCORDING TO THE ABOVE
SAID MARKET VALUE IN LAC 21/2005 VIDE ANNEXURE-"F". B)ISSUE
A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION
DIRECTING THE COURT BELOW TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 08.11.2012 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC AT KUDLIGI IN LAC NO.26/2005 AND EXTEND THE
BENEFITS TO THE PETITIONERS TO THE EFFECT THAT, THE
BENEFITS EXTENDED IN OTHER CLAIMANTS IN LAC NOS.21/2005,
19/2005, 24/2005, 17/2005, 29/2005, 31/2005, 22/2005, 27/2005,
23/2005, 18/2005 AND LAC NO.16/2005, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B
GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3597
WP No. 113033 of 2019
ORDER
The claimants in L.A.C.No.26/2005 are before this Court
challenging the award passed by the Reference Court, by
which, the market value of the subject land was determined at
rupees One lakh per site for one acre of land, with all statutory
benefits from the date of letter of Land Acquisition Officer
18.10.2011. Petitioners' grievance is that the petitioners were
entitled to statutory benefits with effect from the date of
issuance of 4(1) notification, which was extended to other
similarly situated person whose lands were acquired under the
same notification.
2. Learned counsel for the beneficiaries submits that
the award passed by the Reference Court in L.A.C.No.26/2005
was set aside by this Court in MFA No.24561/2013 and the
matter was remanded to the Reference Court to reconsider the
reference petition filed by the petitioners herein afresh.
Thereafter, the Reference Court has passed an award dated
05.01.2022, by which, the market value was determined at the
rate of rupees Four lakh per acre with 12% interest on the
enhanced compensation under Section 23(1)(a) of the Act,
from the date of preliminary notification till the date of award,
among other statutory benefits.
3. The petitioners' grievance is that in view of the
award which is impugned here, the petitioners may be
estopped from claiming statutory benefits from the date of
issuance of preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the
Act, 1894.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3597
4. The apprehension of the petitioners is unfounded,
since the Reference Court has extended the statutory benefits
with effect from the date of issuance of preliminary notification
under Section 4(1) of the Act, 1895. Be that as it may, the
petitioners are at liberty to urge the ground urged herein with
regard to the benefit of extension of statutory benefits with
effect from the date of preliminary notification under Section
4(1) of the Act, 1894 in MFA No.102157/2022. With these
observations, the petition stands disposed of.
5. The petitioners, instead of stating that the reference
petition was filed under Section 18 of the Act, 1894 has stated
that the reference petition is filed under Section 12(2) of the
Act, 1894. The wrong mentioning of the provisions of law will
not take away the rights of the petitioners to seek
enhancement of the compensation as stated under Section 18
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SSP
CT: CNB
