Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 939 (KAR)

Revansiddappa v. Chief Engineer, Knnl

2020-06-01

G.NARENDAR, P.N.DESAI

body2020
JUDGMENT Narendar, J. - Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.2-beneficiary and the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2. The appellants are the owners of land Sy.No.79/2 measuring 01 acre 38 guntas and land Sy.No.79/3 measuring 09 acres 30 guntas situated at village Gadilingadalli Tq: Chincholi Dist: Gulbarga. The lands of the appellants were acquired for executing the Lower Mullamari Project under a 4(1) notification dated 08.11.2007. Subsequently, award was passed on 14.10.2009. The Land Acquisition Officer was pleased to award a meager compensation of Rs.33,500/- per acre in respect of dry lands. The appellants aggrieved by the meager compensation, sought reference under Section 18 (1) of Land Acquisition Act for proper adjudication of the market value. 3. It is the case of appellants that market value of the acquired lands is more than Rs.3,25,000/- per acre. The reference Court on appreciating the material on record, awarded compensation of Rs.1,48,000/- per acre excluding pot kharaba if any. 4. The learned counsel for respondent No.2 beneficiary submits that the issue, with regard to market value of the lands, stand settled by an earlier judgment of this Court rendered in MFA.No.201767/2014. While disposing the appeal, this Court was pleased to enhance the market value of the lands to Rs.2,77,000/- per acre with statutory benefits and costs. The judgment of coordinate Bench rendered in MFA.No.200199/2014 (LAC) dated 11.01.2017 is produced before us. 5. The learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4 would fairly submits that the instant appeal could also be disposed off, by awarding compensation at a similar rate. The submission is placed on record. 6. The Division Bench of this Court while passing the judgment has observed in paragraph No.3 as follows:- "Though several contentions are urged herein, it is unnecessary for this Court to go into the same at this juncture since in a related matter in MFA.No.201767/2014 and connected appeals arising out of the common judgment which is the subject matter in this appeal, one of us (BAPJ) while disposing of the appeal through the judgment dated 13.12.2016 has enhanced the market value to Rs.2,77,000/- per acre with statutory benefits and costs. In that view, a similar consideration is required to be made in the instant appeal as well". 7. In that view, a similar consideration is required to be made in the instant appeal as well". 7. We have perused the material on record and we find that the lands belong to the appellants have been utilized by the respondents for the aforesaid project and in respect of other similarly situated lands have been also utilized by the Government for the aforesaid project under same notification. It is noticed that the compensation awarded at Rs.2,77,000/- per acre by this Court in MFA.No.200199/2014 (LAC) dated 11.01.2017 has become final. In that view of the matter, the judgment of the reference Court requires to be modified. 8. Accordingly, the judgment dated 25.11.2011 rendered in LAC.No.45/2010 is modified enhancing the compensation to Rs.2,77,000/- per acre. Accordingly, judgment and award passed by the reference Court is modified. The appellants shall be entitled to a compensation of Rs.2,77,000/- per acre with statutory benefits and costs. 9. This Court by an order dated 23.01.2018 condoned the delay of 616 days in preferring the appeal. While condoning the delay this Court was pleased to order that the appellants shall not entitled for the interest in respect of delayed period. 10. In that view of the matter, the respondents while depositing the total compensation amount shall deduct the interest in respect of delayed period of 616 days and deposit the balance amount within a period of six months. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.