Karnataka High Court

Nagangouda S/O Mallannagouda vs The Asst.Commissioner And Anr on 27 June, 2024

                                               -1-
                                                       NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342
                                                       MSA No. 200062 of 2017




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                           DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

                                              BEFORE

                           THE HON'BLE Mrs JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA

                        MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO.200062 OF 2017 (LAC)

                   BETWEEN:

                   NAGANGOUDA
                   S/O MALLANNAGOUDA
                   AGE: ABOUT 69 YEARS
                   OCC: AGRICULTURE
                   R/O. NALWAR VILLAGE-585218
                   TQ. CHITTAPUR, DIST. KALABURAGI.

                                                                  ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI NAGARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   THE ASST. COMMISSIONER AND
                        LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
Digitally signed
by SWETA                SEDAM-585 222
KULKARNI                DIST. KALABURAGI.
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka          2.   EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                        PWD SUB-DIVISION
                        OLD JEWARGI ROAD
                        KALABURAGI-585 102.

                                                              ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SMT. ARCHANA P.TIWARI, AAG AND
                      SRI RAJKUMAR A. KORWAR, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2)

                       THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 54(2) OF LAND
                   ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL WITH
                   COSTS AND THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.01.2010
                               -2-
                                      NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342
                                       MSA No. 200062 of 2017




PASSED BY THE III ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE KALABURAGI IN
LACA NO.24/2009, BE MODIFIED BY ENHANCING THE AMOUNT
OF COMPENSATION AT RS.1,11,600/- PER ACRE WITH ALL
STATUTORY BENEFITS AND WITH PROPORTIONATE COSTS.

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

                        JUDGMENT

The claimants are before this Court seeking

enhancement challenging the judgment and award in LACA

No.24/2009 modifying the judgment and award in LAC

No.521/2002 and awarding enhanced compensation of

Rs.66,000/- per acre as against Rs.38,000/- per acre

awarded by the Reference Court with all Statutory

benefits.

2. The claimant/appellant is the owner of land

Sy.No.462/B measuring 1 acre 38 guntas situated Nalwar

village, Taluka Chittapur, District Kalaburagi. The said

land was acquired by the respondents under preliminary

notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act

(for short "Act") dated 21.01.1997 for the purpose of

laying the road from Chittapur to Yadagiri. The SLAO-

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342

respondent No.1 determined the market value and passed

award at Rs.19,000/- per acre, as dry land. On protest

the claimant/appellant preferred reference under Section

28(A) of the Act and the matter was referred to the Civil

Court in LAC No.521/2002.

3. The Reference Court enhanced the

compensation of the acquired land at Rs.38,000/- per acre

as dry land with all statutory benefits. Appeal was

preferred in LACA No.24/2009 seeking further

enhancement of compensation by the claimant. The First

Appellate Court determined and enhanced the

compensation at Rs.66,000/- per acre for the dry land.

Seeking further enhancement, the claimant is before this

Court.

4. Heard Sri Nagaraj Patil, learned counsel for the

claimant/appellant, Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, learned AAG

Sri Rajkumar A Korwar, learned HCGP for the State.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342

5. Learned counsel for the appellant placed

reliance on the judgment of the I Additional District Judge,

Kalaburagi in the case of Mohd. Ibrahim, since dead by LR

vs. The Land Acquisition Officer and Asst. Commissioner,

Sedam (Mohd. Ibrahim) passed in LACA No.326/2015 and

connected matters dated 30.12.2016. Learned counsel,

placing reliance on the said decision stated supra,

contended that similarly situated land in the same village

under the similar notification dated 21.01.1997 for similar

purpose of formation of Chittapur-Yadagiri road, the

appellate Court has awarded compensation of

Rs.6,53,400/- for dry land with all statutory benefits.

Learned counsel submits that the award of the appellate

Court has been already satisfied by the respondent -

Government.

6. Appellant's counsel places on record the map of

the village Nalwar to indicate the location of the

appellant's land Sy.No.462/B and survey number of the

appellants in Mohd. Ibrahim's case stated supra.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342

7. Learned Additional Advocate General Smt.

Archana P. Tiwari submits that there is no evidence to the

effect that the lands in LACA No.326/2015 and connected

matters are similarly placed to the appellant's lands and in

the absence of the same, the appellant would not be

entitled for the compensation as awarded in LACA

No.326/2015 and connected matters and sought for

dismissal of the appeal.

8. This Court has carefully considered the rival

contentions urged by the learned counsel for the parties

and perused the material on record including the sketch

produced by the appellant showing the location of the

acquired land.

9. Preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of

the Act was published in the final gazette on 21.01.1997.

The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award at the rate

of Rs.19,000/- per acre. The Reference Court awarded

compensation at Rs.38,000/- per acre for dry land with all

statutory benefits and the first appellate Court by applying

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342

the earlier judgment awarded Rs.66,000/- per acre.

Seeking enhancement, the appellant is before this Court.

10. The appellant is the owner of the land in

Sy.No.462/B measuring 1 acre 38 guntas situated at

village Nalwar, taluk and district Kalaburagi. The District

Court, in Mohd. Ibrahim's case stated supra under the

similar notification dated 21.01.1997 for the similar

project of widening Chittapur-Yadagiri road for the lands

Sy.Nos.472, 473, 470(Aa), 470(A), 407/1 and 407/2,

situated at Nalwar Village, looking into the feasibility of the

land, the map of the village and considering that the

adjoining land owner of Sy.No.463 had already converted

the land into non-agriculture plots, further considering that

the lands acquired by the appellant are by the side of the

State Highway and also taking note of the location of the

land and the ending potentiality, has awarded

compensation to the appellants therein at Rs.6,53,400/-.

It is brought to the notice of the Court that the State has

already satisfied the claim in the aforesaid appeals and the

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342

order dated 30.11.2016 passed in Mohd. Ibrahim's case

stated supra has attained finality.

11. In the instant case, the appellant herein has

produced the map of Nalwar Village, the location of

Sy.No.462 the acquired land of the appellant herein is just

adjoining to Sy.Nos.470, 472, 473, 407 as well as

Sy.No.463, which is already been converted into N.A. use.

In the light of the same, appellant is entitled for

compensation as awarded to the owners of adjoining lands

in the case of Mohd. Ibrahim stated supra. In the said

circumstances, the appeal of the claimant needs to be

allowed and compensation of the appellant is fixed at

Rs.6,53,400/- with all statutory benefits and the decision

of Mohd. Ibrahim's case is squarely applicable to the

present facts.

12. For the foregoing reasons, this Court pass the

following:

NC: 2024:KHC-K:4342

ORDER

(i) The appeal of the claimant is allowed with costs.

(ii) The appellant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.6,53,400/- per acre as against Rs.66,000/- awarded by the first appellate Court, with interest and all statutory benefits thereon as per the laws and rules. However, it is made clear that the appellant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period before this Court as well as before the first appellate Court.