Research › Browse › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

1974 DIGILAW 61 (KAR)

ANNAJI SHANKAR NADAGOUDA v. STATE OF MYSORE

1974-03-18

K.J.SHETTY

body1974
( 1 ) THESE are two petitions under Art. 227 arising out of a common order of the Karnataka Revenue Appellate Tribunal dt. 6th Aug. 1971 made in appeal 138 of 1971. ( 2 ) PETITIONER in WP. 318 of 1973 is one Annaji Shankar Nadagouda, whom I shall refer to as 'the Jagirdar'. His jagir was abolished by the Bombay Merged Territories and Areas (Jagirs Abolition) Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ). WP. 716 of 1973 is brought on behalf of the State of Karnataka. ( 3 ) THE common grievance in these petitions, is in respect of the correctness of compensation awarded to the Jagirdar under S. 11 (2) of the act. In addition, the Jagirdar has got some more grievance to which i shall refer in detail a little later. ( 4 ) THE primary question for decision relates to the meaning of the , expression 'three multiples of the assessment' which should be the basis for awarding compensation under S 11 (2) of the Act. The dispute in this case has, however, been narrowed down by the earlier order of remand made by the Tribunal in Appeal 2901 of 1967 One of the directions in the said rcmand order was that the Jagirdar should be awarded compensation equivalent to 3 multiples of the assessment of lands held by permanent holder under Section 11 (2) of the Act. Pursuant to the said direction, the Assistant Commr calculated the assessment oi the land at Rs 1,155-05 though the Jagirdar said that the total assessment of such lands was Rs. 1,947 The Asst Commr. said that the expression three multiples of the said assessment, is 27 times the assessment, and on that basis, he awarded compensation Aggrieved by the award, the State preferred an appeal belore the Tribunal The Tribunal by the older which is impugned in this petition, has stated thus" The first multiple of the assessment of Rs. 1155-65 would be rs. 2,311-30. This is a figure which is a multiple of the assessment of rs 1,155-65. In the same way as it is a multiple of 7 indicated in the example quoted by Oxford Dictionary The respondent will be entitled to this amount. 1155-65 would be rs. 2,311-30. This is a figure which is a multiple of the assessment of rs 1,155-65. In the same way as it is a multiple of 7 indicated in the example quoted by Oxford Dictionary The respondent will be entitled to this amount. In the same way Rs 3466-95 would be the second multiple of the assessment of Rs 1,155-65 The respondent would be entitled to this amount also Similarly, Rs 4,622-68 would be the third multiple to which the respondent would be entitled Thus adding three multiples of the assessment of Rs. 1,155-65 the respondent is entitled to an amount of Rs. 10,400-85 which would represent the three multiples of the assessment of the land in the proprietary Jagir We therefore modify the order of the Asst Commr to this extent " ( 5 ) THE Tribunal has taken the view that three multiples of the assessment means and times of the assessment and not 27 times of the assessment as held by the Asst. Commr. Mr S. C. Javali, learned Counsel for the jagirdar, urges in support of the view of the Asst Commr. , whereas learned advocate -General submits that both these views are incorrect. The argument of Mr Javali proceeds on the basis that the expression 'three multiples' is used in contra distinction to the doubles, trebles or three times of the assessment. He said that in any event, the expression means, 3 x 3 x 3, i. e. , 27 times of the assessment. But learned Advocate-General says that the multiple is just a unit or a measure, and it has no definite connotation either in common parlance or in legal terminology, and therefore it cannot exceed 3 times of the assessment. ( 6 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary to understand the meaning of the word multiple. If we understand that it would be easier tq solve the problem before us Multiple is a common measure of two or more numbers and it is a number which divides each of those numbers an exact number of times. Say, 12 is a common measure of 48, 72, and 120, or 2 is a common measure of 4. Counsel on both the sides have referred to me the dictionary meaning of the word 'multiple'. In Stroud's Judicial Dictionary Vol. 3, 4th Edn. Say, 12 is a common measure of 48, 72, and 120, or 2 is a common measure of 4. Counsel on both the sides have referred to me the dictionary meaning of the word 'multiple'. In Stroud's Judicial Dictionary Vol. 3, 4th Edn. p. 1715, the 'multiple' is defined thus :" This term may be understood in a restricted sense so as to comprehend only multiples numerically expressed, such as 10 pounds, 100 pounds, etc. , or generally all multiples, however expressed, such as a stone. . . . . . . . "in Shorter Oxford English Dictionary at page 1296, the said word is defined to mean : " A quantity. which contains another quantity some number of times without remainder. " ( 7 ) BOTH the above definitions give as an indication that multiple is a unit which contains another quantity some number of times without remainder and not equivalent to the samp number which divides it 2 cannot therefore be a multiple of 2. 4 can be the Jeast multiple of 2 Likewise, three multiples of assessment cannot mean three times the assessment. The contention of Mr Advocate-General has, therefore, tn be peiected. The minimum of three multiples of assessment means six times the assessment. That is the reasonable view which, I think, T should take in the present rase The Tribunal was therefore, wrong in awarding compensation at 9 times the assessment. ( 8 ) NOW I consider the correctness of the compensation awarded to gairana land. The Asst. Commr has awarded compensation of Rs 4. 53 at the rate of assessment of Be 0-41 per acre for 10 acres 3 juntas. The Tribunal has stated that the Jagirdar has not challenged the correctness of the rate of compensation That being the position, the petitioner cannot question the correctness in this Wait Petition ( 9 ) THIS takes me on to the correctness of the compensation in respect of the water in two tanks and also in the Markandeya river. The asst Commr. has awarded Rs. The asst Commr. has awarded Rs. 7,012-50 He has taken the average water at Rs 5 per aere and has awarded compensation at three tinies the water rate The Tribunal has affirmed that rate and also the measure of compensation I have no malarial before me to hold that the view taken bv the Tribunal on this question was in anv way, erroneous ( 10 ) TN the result, WP 716 of 1973 allowed in part. That portion of the award giving compensation under S 11 (2) of the Act to the jagirdar is modified and limited to a sum of Rs 6,933-90 The award in other respects is kept undisturbed Ponseq ently WP 318 of 1973 is dismissed ( 11 ) UNDER the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs in both these petitions --- *** --- .