Karnataka High Court
Sri. Devaraju vs The Deputy Commissioner on 5 February, 2025
Author: M.G.S. Kamal
Bench: M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT PETITION NO. 737 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
C/W
WRIT PETITION NO. 736 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 739 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 750 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 753 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
WRIT PETITION NO. 895 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
IN WP No. 737/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. KARIGOWDA T.K,
S/O KENCHEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
Digitally signed by
SUMA B N
Location: High 2. SMT THYAMMA
Court of Karnataka
W/O MADEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS
BOTH ARE PETITIOENRS ARE
R/O THIRUMALAPURA VILLAGE
SANABA HOBLI
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 567 155.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA - 571 401.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BUILDING
MANDYA - 571 401.
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED
SURFACE WATER DATA
ANAND RAO CIRCLE
SESHADRI ROAD
GANDHI NAGAR, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 560 001.
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDINGS
BANGALORE-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N. HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4;
SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH.,ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
FIRST RESPONDENT AUTHORITY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA OR THE SECOND RESPONDENT THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANDYA TO CONSIDER THE
APPLICATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS FILED FOR THE AWARD OF
DAMAGES FROM 1993 TO 2001 (DATE OF DISPOSSESSION TO
TILL DATE OF 4(1) NOTIFICATION) DATED 31/10/2022 VIDE
ANNEXURE-B AND B1 AND REMINDER NOTICE DATED
19/10/2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND C1.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
IN WP NO. 736/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI KESHAVA S R,
S/O T RAMU
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/O SANABA VILLAGE
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
2. SMT JAYAMMA
W/O S N KRISHNWGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS
R/O SANABA KOPPALU VLLAGE
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
3. SRI RAMESHA
S/O NINGEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/O SANABA KOPPALU VILLAGE
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA - 571 401.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BUILDING
MANDYA - 571 401.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED
SURFACE WATER DATA
ANAND RAO CIRCLE
SESHADRI ROAD
GANDHI NAGAR, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 560 001.
4. THE STAE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDINGS
BANGALORE 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N. HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4;
SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R-1 AUTHORITY DC, MANDYA OR THE R-2 THE
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANDYA, TO
CONSIDER THE APPLICATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS FILED
FOR THE AWARD OF DAMAGES FROM 1993 TO 2001 (DATE
OF DISPOSSESSION TO TILL DATE OF 4(1) NOTIFICATION)
DATED 08.11.2022 AND 14.05.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE
ANNX-B TO B2 AND REMINDER NOTICE DATED 19.10.2024
VIDE ANNEXURE-C TO C2.
IN WP NO. 739/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI S B SWAMYGOWDA,
S/O LATE BETTEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
2. SRI. CHALUVEGOWDA,
S/O HANUMANTHEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
R/O SANABADAKOPPALU VILLAGE,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
3. SRI. NARASIMHEGOWDA,
S/O BETTEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/O SANABADAKOPPALU VILLAGE,
PADAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
4. SRI. GOPAL GOWDA S N
S/O NARASEGOWDA S N,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
R/O NO. 9, 1ST MAIN,
2ND CROSS, MANJUNATH NAGAR,
CHIKKALASANDRA, BANGALORE SOUTH,
BANGALORE-560 061.
LATE SHIVAPPA,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
5. SRI S KUMARASWAMY,
S/O LATE SHIVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
6. SRI. CHANDRAPPA,
S/O LATE SHIVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
7. SRI. ESHWARA,
S/O JAVAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
8. SRI. S B JAVAREGOWDA,
S/O LATE BETTEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/O SANABADA KOPPALU VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
9. SRI. CHIKKAPAAPEGOWDA,
S/O CHALUVEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS,
R/O SANABADA KOPPALU VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
10. SRI. DHANU KOTIGOWDA,
S/O CHALUVEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
LATE S K SWAMYGOWDA,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
11. SMT. VARALAKSHMI,
W/O LATE S K SWAMY GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
12. SRI. S GANGADHARA,
S/O LATE S K SWAMY GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
R/O SANABA VILLAGE,
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
13. SMT. SHASHIKALA,
W/O NANJUNDEGOWDA K M,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/O KYATHANAHALLI VILLAGE,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
14. SRI. VENKATEGOWDA
S/O DODDAIDEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 85 YEARS,
R/O THIRUMALAPURA VILLAGE,
PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANDYA DISTRICT,
MANDYA -571 401.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BUILDING,
MANDYA 571 401.
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED,
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
SURFACE WATER DATA,
ANAND RAO CIRCLE,
SESHADRI ROAD,
GANDHI NAGAR,
BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA 560 001.
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY,
LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT,
M.S.BUILDINGS,
BANGALORE-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4;
SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
A) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE FIRST
RESPONDENT AUTHORITY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA OR THE SECOND RESPONDENT THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANDYA, TO CONSIDER THE
APPLICATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS FILED FOR THE
AWARD OF DAMAGES FROM 1993 TO 2001 (DATE OF
DISPOSSESSION TO TILL DATE OF 4(1) NOTIFICATION)
DATED 31-10-2022, 08.11.2022 AND 14.05.2024 VIDE
ANNEXURE ANNEXURES - B TO B10 AND REMINDER
NOTICE DATED 19.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURES-C TO C10.
IN WP NO. 750/2025
BETWEEN:
SRI T B RAMU
S/O BETTAIAH
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/O THIRUMALAPURA VILLAGE
SANABA HOBLI
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA,
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA - 571 401.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BUILDING
MANDYA - 571 401.
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
CAUVERY NERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED
SURFACE WATER DATA
ANAND RAO CIRCLE
SESHADRI ROAD
GANDHI NAGAR
BENGALURU
KARNATAKA 560 001.
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILDINGS
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4;
SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
DIRECT THE R-1 AUTHORITY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA OR THE R-2 THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION
OFFICER, MANDYA TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATIONS OF
THE PETITIONER FILED FOR THE AWARD OF DAMAGES
FROM 1993 TO 2001 (DATE OF DISPOSSESSION TO TILL
DATE OF 4(1) NOTIFICATION) DATED 14.05.2024 VIDE
ANNEXURE-B BEARING NO.LBC LAQ No.5/06-07 AND
REMINDER NOTICE DATED 19.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-C.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
IN WP NO. 753/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. BHAGYA,
D/O KARIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
R/O NO.75
KAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
CHINNAKURALI HOBLI
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 435.
2. SRI. HANUMANTHEGOWDA
S/O BOREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
R/O DEVEGOWDANAKOPPALU VILLAGE
NARAYANAPURA
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
LATE GOVINDEGOWDA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S
3. SRI SHESHEGOWDA K G
S/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
4. SMT PADMAMMA
W/O KEMPEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
5. SRI CHANDRA K.G.
S/O LATE GOVINDEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
PETITIONERS NO. 3 TO 6 ARE ALL
R/O KAMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE
CHINAKURALI HOBLI
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 455.
6. SMT MANJAMMA
W/O VENKATESH
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
VADDARAHALLI VILLAGE
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 435.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA - 571 401.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BUILDING
MANDYA - 571 401.
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED
SURFACE WATER DATA
ANAND RAO CIRCLE
SESHADRI ROAD
GANDHI NAGAR, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 560 001.
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDINGS
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4;
SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
A) ISSUE WRIT OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE FIRST
RESPONDENT AUTHORITY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MANDYA OR THE SECOND RESPONDENT THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANDYA, TO CONSIDER THE
APPLICATIONS OF THE PETITIONERS FILED FOR THE
AWARD OF DAMAGES FROM 1993 TO 2001 (DATE OF
DISPOSSESSION TO TILL DATE OF 4(1) NOTIFICATION)
DATED 31-10-2022 VIDE ANNEXURES-B TO B2 AND
REMINDER NOTICE DTD 19.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURES-C
TO C2.
IN WP NO. 895/2025
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. DEVARAJU,
S/O DODDABETTAIAH
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/O NO.22 NEAR NARAYAN BAKERY
BHIMA ROHINI
1ST CROSS, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR
MYSURU - 570 022.
2. SRI. BETTAIAH
S/O LATE BETTAIAH
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS
R/O HIREMALI VILLAGE
PANDAVAPURA TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT -571 434.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. P MAHESHA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
MANDYA DISTRICT
MANDYA - 571 401.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BUILDING
MANDYA - 571 401.
3. THE MANAGING DIRCTOR
CAUVERY NERAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED
SURFACE WATER DATA
ANAND RAO CIRCLE
SESHADRI ROAD
GANDHI NAGAR BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 560 001.
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY
LAND ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT
M S BUILDINGS
BANGALORE - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1, R2 & R4;
SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R-1
AUTHORITY DC, MANDYA OR THE R-2 THE SPECIAL LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, MANDYA, TO CONSIDER THE APPLICATIONS
OF THE PETITIONERS FILED FOR THE AWARD OF DAMAGES FROM
1993 TO 2001 (DATE OF DISPOSSESSION TO TILL DATE OF 4(1)
NOTIFICATION) DATED 31.10.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-B AND B1 AND
REMINDER NOTICE DATED 19.10.2024 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND C1.
THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
WP No. 737 of 2025
C/W WP No. 736 of 2025
WP No. 739 of 2025
AND 3 OTHERS
ORAL ORDER
Petitioners in all these petitions claim to be the erstwhile
owners of the following properties situated at Thirumalapura
Village, Sanaba Hobli, Pandavapura Taluk, Mandya District:
W.P.No. RANK OF LAC NO. SY.NO. EXTENT TOTAL
PETI- IN THIRUMALA EXTENT
TIONERS PURA VILLAGE
1.737/2025 1 304/200 4/12 0-15 0-15
2 4/12P 0-15 0-15
2.736/2025 1 95/4 0-04, 0-33
69/2012 0-29
2 187/2 0.02 0-02
3 57/2012 183/4 0.05 0-05
3.739/2025 1 108/6 0.04.08, 2-11.08
108/4 0-04,
109/1 0-06,
109/3 0-11,
109/8 0-18,
109/5 0-04,
109/4 0-10,
109/7 0-09,
205/4 0-03,
94/6 0-04.08,
105/3 0-05.08,
111/10 0-12
2 80/2009 125/7 0-03, 0-11
185/5 0-08
3 219/200 197/9 0-13 0-13
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
4 80/2009 161/2 0-04 0-04
5 and 6 61/2006 115/4 0-08 0-33
and 115/8 0-04
101/5, 0-06
103/2 0-15
7 219/200 208/2 0-21 0-21
8 219/200 181/4, 0-07 0-16 1/2
150/18, 0-05
153/4, 0-03,
153/6 0-01 1/2
9 80/2009 185/10 0-04 1/2 0-04 1/2
10 80/2009 125/11 0-02, 0-07
2/9 0-03
206/2 0-02
11 to 13 219/200 202/1 Pi 3 0-04 0-04
14 114/200 16/6 0-02 0-02
4.750/2025 1 70/12 15/2 0-05 0-05
5.753/2025 1 78/2009 80/1 0-06 0-06
2 67/2009 37/2 0-02 0-02
3 to 6 382/200 80/1 0-17 0-17
6.895/2025 1 30/1 0-11 0-11
30/1 0-14½ 0-14½
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
2. Case of the petitioners is that they were dispossessed
from the aforesaid lands on account of they having been sub-
merged under Tonnur Tank during the year 1992-93. It appears
subsequently in the year 2002 the State Government had issued
Preliminary notification under sub-Section (1) of Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act in respect of the aforesaid lands. Award was
passed fixing the market value of the said lands at the rate of
Rs.90,640/- per acre. Being dissatisfied, Reference was preferred
under Section 18 of the Act. Compensation was enhanced to
Rs.2,92,500/- by the Reference Court which was again enhanced
by this Court to Rs.5,00,000/- per acre. An appeal was preferred
by the State before the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.3838/2010
whereby the compensation was reduced to Rs.2,30,000/-. Even
while disposing of the aforesaid appeal the Apex Court relying
upon its earlier Judgment in the case of R.L.Jain(D) by Lrs Vs
DDA and others reported in (2004) 4 SCC 79 in the case of
Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs Karigowda and others
in Civil Appeal No.3838/2010 at paragraphs 76, 77 and 78
has held as under:
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
"76. The claimants while relying upon the judgment of this
Court in Satinder Singh & Ors. v. Umrao Singh and Anr.
[AIR 1961 SC 908] and some other judgments of the High
Court had claimed that they are entitled to receive interest
from the date when their lands were submerged in the
year 1993 onwards and not from the date of the
Notification i.e. 4th April, 2002. It was contended that
since they had lost possession and interest being payable
in lieu of possession, they would be entitled to receive
interest from those dates i.e. from 1993, and not from the
date the Land Acquisition Collector had granted, i.e. 4th
April, 2002. The Reference Court as well as the High Court
accepted this contention while referring to the judgments
of the Executive Engineer, Dhenkanal Minor Irrigation
Division, Orissa & Ors. v. N.C. Budharaj (deceased) by Lrs.
& Ors., [(2001) 2 SCC 721 ] and Satinder Singh (Supra),
granted the relief to the claimants as prayed.
77. The reliance placed by the respondents upon the
judgment of N.C.Budharaj (supra), was with reference to
the scope and interpretation of the relevant provisions of
the Act. That case related to the provisions of the Indian
Arbitration Act, 1940 and with reference to the relevant
sections of the Interest Act, 1839, where this Court has
held that provisions of the Act could be made applicable to
arbitration as there was nothing to indicate that its
application was restricted. Thus, it is not necessary for us
to deliberate on the judgment of N.C. Budharaj case
(supra) any further. Further, even the reliance placed upon
Satinder Singh case (supra) is not of much help to the
respondents. This judgment relates to the period, prior to
introduction and/or amendment of Sections 23(1A), 23(2)
and 34 of the Act i.e. on 30th April, 1982 and 24th
September, 1984. It has been contended on behalf of the
appellants, that it is now a well settled proposition of law
that Reference Court cannot grant interest for any period
prior to the issuance of the Notification under Section 4 of
the Act. As such, possession even if taken or assumed to
have been taken earlier would, dehor the provisions of the
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
Act and, therefore, was improper. Thus, the possession has
to be legal and within the framework of law. The provision
of the Act clearly lays down the procedure required to be
followed while taking possession of the acquired land. The
words "from the date on which he took the possession of
the land" occurring in Section 20 would mean lawful taking
of possession. The case of Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills
Ltd. v. State of Gujarat [(1991) 1 SCC 262], also stated
the principle that, interest on the compensation amount
could be awarded under Section 34 of the Act, with effect
from the date of taking possession. However, this
controversy need not detain us any further, as the three
Judge Bench of this Court in the case of R.L. Jain (D) by
Lrs. v. DDA & Ors. [2004 (4) SCC 79] considered all these
aspects of the matter and held as under :-
".......
15. Similar view has been taken in a recent
decision by a Bench of two Judges in Lila Ghosh v.
State of W.B., reported in (2004) 9 SCC 337 and
the reasons given there in para 16 of the Report
are being reproduced below:
16. ......There are two decisions of this Court,
wherein same controversy arose, namely, whether
the claimant would be entitled to additional sum at
the rate of twelve per centum on the market value
where possession has been taken over prior to
publication of notification under Section 4(1). In
Special Tahsildar (LA), PWD Schemes v.M.A.
Jabbar, reported in (1995) 2 SCC 142 which has
been decided by a Bench of two Judges (K.
Ramaswamy and Mrs Sujata V. Manohar, JJ.), it
was held that the claimant would not be entitled
to this additional sum for the period anterior to
publication of notification under Section 4(1).
However, in Asstt. Commr., Gadag Sub-Division v.
Mathapathi Basavannewwa, reported in (1995) 6
SCC 355 also decided by a two-Judge Bench
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
(K.Ramaswamy and B.L. Hansaria, JJ.) it was held
that even though notification under Section 4(1)
was issued after taking possession of the acquired
land the owners would be entitled to additional
amount at twelve per cent per annum from the
date of taking possession though notification
under Section 4(1) was published later. For the
reasons already indicated, we are of the opinion
that the view taken in Special Tahsildar (supra) is
legally correct and the view to the contrary taken
in Asstt. Commr.(supra) is not in accordance with
law and is hereby overruled.
17. Shri Dave, learned counsel for the appellant
has also placed strong reliance on Satinder Singh
v. Umrao Singh (supra) wherein the question of
payment of interest in the matter of award of
compensation was considered by this Court. In
this case the initial notification was issued under
Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 but
the proceedings for acquisition were completed
under East Punjab Act 48 of 1948. The High Court
negatived the claim for interest on the ground that
the 1948 Act made no provision for award of
interest. After quoting with approval the following
observations of the Privy Council in Inglewood
Pulp and Paper Co. Ltd. v. New Brunswick Electric
Power Commission, reported in AIR 1928 PC 287.
"upon the expropriation of land under statutory
power, whether for the purpose of private gain or
of good to the public at large, the owner is entitled
to interest upon the principal sum awarded from
the date when possession was taken, unless the
statute clearly shows a contrary intention" the
Bench held as under:
"... when a claim for payment of interest is made
by a person whose immovable property has been
acquired compulsorily he is not making claim for
damages properly or technically so-called; he is
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
basing his claim on the general rule that if he is
deprived of his land he should be put in
possession of compensation immediately; if not, in
lieu of possession taken by compulsory acquisition
interest should be paid to him on the said amount
of compensation".
17.1. The normal rule, therefore, is that if on
account of acquisition of land a person is deprived
of possession of his property he should be paid
compensation immediately and if the same is not
paid to him forthwith he would be entitled to
interest thereon from the date of dispossession till
the date of payment thereof. But here the land
has been acquired only after the preliminary
notification was issued on 9-9-1992 as earlier
acquisition proceedings were declared to be null
and void in the suit instituted by the landowner
himself and consequently, he was not entitled to
compensation or interest thereon for the anterior
period.
18. In a case where the landowner is dispossessed
prior to the issuance of preliminary notification
under Section 4(1) of the Act the Government
merely takes possession of the land but the title
thereof continues to vest with the landowner. It is
fully open for the landowner to recover the
possession of his land by taking appropriate legal
proceedings. He is therefore only entitled to get
rent or damages for use and occupation for the
period the Government retains possession of the
property. Where possession is taken prior to the
issuance of the preliminary notification, in our
opinion, it will be just and equitable that the
Collector may also determine the rent or damages
for use of the property to which the landowner is
entitled while determining the compensation
amount payable to the landowner for the
acquisition of the property. The provisions of
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
Section 48 of the Act lend support to such a
course of action. For delayed payment of such
amount appropriate interest at prevailing bank
rate may be awarded."
78. We are bound by the decision of the larger Bench,
which had considered the case of Satinder Singh (supra),
on which the reliance has even been placed by the
claimants in the present appeal. The larger Bench after
detailed discussion on the subject, rejected the claim for
payment of interest claimed by the respondents in those
cases, prior to the date of issuance of the Notification
under Section 4 of the Act. As is evident from the above
dictum of the Court, despite dispossession, the title
continues to vest in the land owners and it is open for the
land owners to take action in accordance with law. Once
notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act has been issued
and the acquisition proceedings culminated into an award
in terms of Section 11, then alone the land vests in the
State free of any encumbrance or restriction in terms of
provisions of Section 16 of the Act. The Court, in situations
where possessions has been taken prior to issuance of
notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, can direct the
Collector to examine the extent of rent or damage that the
owners of land would be entitled to the provisions of
Section 48 of the Act would come to aid and the Court
would also be justified in issuing appropriate direction. This
was the unequivocal view expressed by the Court in R.L.
Jain case (supra) as well. This legal question is no more
open to controversy and stands settled by this Court. We
would follow the view taken and accept the contention of
the appellant-State that the Reference Court as well as the
High Court could not have granted any interest under the
provisions of the Act, for a date anterior to the issuance of
Notification under Section 4 of the Act. However, following
the dictum of the Bench, we direct the Collector to
examine the question of payment of rent/damages to the
claimants, from the period when their respective lands
were submerged under the back water of the river, till the
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
date of issuance of the Notification under Section 4(1) of
the Act, from which date, they would be entitled to the
statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation."
3. Thereafter at paragraph (iv) of the operative portion of
the order the Apex Court issued the following direction:
"(iv) Following the principle and the directions stated
by this Court in R.L. Jain's case (supra), we grant
liberty to the claimants to file applications before the
competent authority (State Government/concerned
Collector) to claim damages for their dispossession
from the lands owned by them as a result of
submerging, till the date of issuance of notification
under Section 4 of the Act i.e. 4th April, 2002. These
applications may be filed within eight weeks from the
date of pronouncement of this judgment. If such
applications are filed we direct the competent
authority to consider the same sympathetically and
award such amounts to the claimants as may be
payable in accordance with law expeditiously. We
make it clear that the amounts, if already paid for this
period, shall be adjusted."
4. It is this order of the Apex Court which is now relied
upon by the petitioners in justification of their present petitions.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners reiterating the averments
and grounds urged in the petitions submit that petitioners filed
representations as per Annexures-C and C1 to the writ petitions
before the respondent-Deputy Commissioner to consider grant of
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
damages for the period between 1992-93 to 2001-2002 during
which period the possession of lands belonging to the petitioners
was taken without issuance of notification under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act. He submits despite their being specific
observation and direction by the Apex Court, the authorities have
not considered the representations of the petitioners constraining
them to approach this Court. Hence, seeks for allowing of the
petition.
6. Learned AGA does not dispute the aforesaid factual and
legal aspect of the matter. However, he submits regarding the
entitlement of each of the petitioners, the same has to be
considered based on the material that may be presented by the
petitioners and respondent No.3 beneficiary of the project before
the respondent authorities. He submits given sometime
respondent-Deputy Commissioner would consider the
representations and pass necessary orders in accordance with
law.
7. Submission taken on record.
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
8. Learned AGA submits that the petitioners may be
directed to submit a fresh representation with documents
supporting their claim for damages.
9. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
a) Petitions are allowed.
b) Petitioners are directed to submit fresh application along
with the supporting documents within 30 days from the
date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
c) Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider the
representations/applications to be filed by the petitioners
seeking award of damages for the period from 1993 to 2001
strictly in accordance with law keeping in mind the law
enunciated by the Apex Court as extracted hereinabove
subject to petitioners satisfying the requirement as may be
requisitioned by the respondent authorities.
d) Such exercise shall be undertaken and orders in that
regard be passed and same be communicated to the
petitioners within an outer limit of six months from the date
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC:5408
AND 3 OTHERS
of submission of representation/application by the
petitioners.
Sri.K.S.Bheemaiah, learned counsel is permitted to file
vakalath for respondent No.3 within one week.
SD/-
(M.G.S. KAMAL)
JUDGE
SBN
