Karnataka High Court
Srinivas Rao S/O Shankar Rao vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer ... on 6 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3666
MSA No. 200299 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mrs JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA
MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO. 200299 OF 2019 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
SRINIVAS RAO S/O SHANKAR RAO
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: BHUNYAR, TQ: & DIST: KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI NAGARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
M & MIP, VIKAS SOUDHA,
Digitally signed KALABURAGI-585102.
by SUMITRA
SHERIGAR
Location: High 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
Court of
Karnataka M.I. DIVISION,
KALABURAGI-585102.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KALABURAGI-585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG AND
SRI RAJKUMAR A. KORWAR, HCGP)
THIS MSA IS FILED U/S. 54(2) OF LAND QCQUISITIOAN
ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS AND
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3666
MSA No. 200299 of 2019
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF THE ADDL. CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) GULBARGA, DATED: 13.06.2001 IN LAC
NO.667/2000, AND ALSO THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF III
ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, AT KALABURAGI, DATED 31.07.2017
IN LACA NO.109/2017, AND FIX THE MARKET VALUE FOR LAND
ACQUIRED AT THE RATE OF RS.1,97,677/- PER ACRE FOR DRY
LAND AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS, INCLUDING
INTEREST ON THE ENTIRE COMPENSATION AMOUNT, AND
GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF, WHICH THIS COURT DEEMS FIT IN
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Claimant is before this Court assailing the judgment and
award dated 31.07.2017 passed by in LACA No.109/2017 by
the III Additional District Judge, Kalaburagi (for short
'Appellate Court') enhancing compensation to Rs.1,18,000/-
per acre for dry land, modifying the judgment and award dated
13.06.2001 passed in LAC No.667/2000 by the Addl. Civil
Judge (Sr.Dn.) Kalaburagi (for short 'Reference Court'). The
appellant is seeking for further enhancement.
2. The claimant is the owner of Survey No.5/2
measuring 3 acres 22 guntas of dry land in Bhunyar Village; by
preliminary notification dated 31.10.1996 for the purpose of
construction of Bhunyar Minor Irrigation Tank the land of the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3666
claimant is acquired. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded
compensation of Rs.9,000/- per acre for dry land; in the
reference sought before the Reference Court, the compensation
was enhanced to Rs.37,000/- per acre for the dry land and in
the appeal preferred by the claimant before the Appellate Court
a compensation of 1,18,000/- has been awarded for the dry
land.
3. Heard Sri Nagaraj Patil, learned counsel appearing
for the appellant-claimant, Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, learned
Additional Advocate General and Sri Rajkumar A. Korwar, High
Court Government Pleader for the respondents.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-
claimant placed reliance on the decision of the Co-Ordinate
Bench of this Court in MSA No.200132/2020 C/w. with
MSA Crob. No.200001/2022 in the case of the Special Land
Acquisition Officer and Others v. Revansiddappa disposed
of on 08.04.2022 to contend that under a similar notification
dated 31.10.1996, similarly situated land in the same village
for similar purpose of construction of Bhuynar Water Tank, the
Co-Ordinate Bench has enhanced the compensation by
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3666
determining the market value of the acquired land at the rate
of Rs.1,97,677/- per acre.
5. Learned AAG appearing for the respondents does
not rebut that the present appeal is squarely covered by the
decision of the Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court in
Revanasiddappa's case stated supra.
6. This Court has carefully considered the rival
contentions urged by the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material on record.
7. Claimant's land was acquired under preliminary
notification dated 31.10.1996 for the purpose of construction of
Bhunyar Minor Irrigation Project. The Land Acquisition Officer
assessed market value at Rs.9,000/- per acre for dry land.
8. On reference Before the reference Court the
claimant had examined one witness as PW1 and got marked
the documents at Exs.P1 to P10. The Reference Court awarded
compensation of Rs.37,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the
compensation of the reference Court, the claimant preferred
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3666
appeal before the Appellate Court. The appellate Court
awarded compensation of Rs.1,18,000/- per acre for dry land.
9. For the similarly situated land in LACA
No.236/2016, the Appellate Court has determined the
compensation and fixed the market value of the land at the
rate of Rs.1,97,677/- per acre. No appeal has been preferred
by the State assailing the said judgment and the said judgment
of the appellate Court in LACA No.236/2016 has attained
finality.
10. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the appeal
preferred by the State against the LACA No.122/2012 has
dismissed the appeal preferred by the State and enhanced the
compensation in the Cross-Appeal preferred by the claimants
holding that they are entitled for Rs.1,97,677/- per acre placing
reliance on the judgment of the Appellate Court in LACA
No.236/2016 which has attained finality. The notification, the
purpose for acquisition and the potentiality of the lands of the
claimant is as exemplar to LACA No.236/2016. Considering the
market value determined by the Appellate Court in LACA
No.236/2016 and the decision of the Co-Ordinate Bench of this
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3666
Court being squarely applicable to the facts of the present case,
the claimant is entitled for market value at the rate of
Rs.1,97,677/- per acre with statutory benefits and interest
thereon as per the law. Accordingly, this Court pass the
following:
ORDER
i. The miscellaneous second appeal is hereby
allowed in part;
ii. The claimant is entitled to compensation of
Rs.1,97,677/- per acre with all statutory
benefits and interest thereon, with cost;
iii. For the delay caused in preferring the appeal
before the Appellate Court and before this
Court, the appellant is not entitled for the
interest for the said period.
iv. The deficit Court fee, if any, to be paid by the
appellant within a period of four weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SBS
CT: VD
