The main legal point established in the judgment is that the beneficiary of an acquisition is entitled to maintain an appeal against the order of enhancement made by the Reference Court, and Court fee is payable on the differential amount of compensation as per Section 48 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958.

( 1 ) MADE the following: in these appeals filed against the order of the Principal Civil Judge (Senior division), Mangalore, in proceedings under Section 18 of the Land acquisition Act, the respondent-landowner has raised a two-fold preliminary objection; one touching the maintainability of the appeal and the other, the liability of the appellant to pay Court fee. Mr. R. Vijaya Kumar, Counsel appearing for the landowner strenuously argued that the appellar did not have an unqualified right to file an appeal against the judgment of the reference Court and that even if any such right is conceded in his favour, the same could be exercised only after obtaining the leave of this Court. Alternatively, he argued that in an appeal preferred by the beneficiary of an acquisition also, Court fee was payable on the amount representing the difference between the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and that awarded by the Reference Court. The appellant had not, it was contended by Mr. Kurnar, paid the requisite Court fee on the differential amount which it was legally liable to pay.

( 2 ) MR. Padubidri Raghavendra Rao, Counsel appearing for the appellant on the other hand, argued that the question whether a right of appeal vested in the beneficiary of an acquisition was no longer res Integra in the light of the decision of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in U. P. Awas Evam vikas Parishad v Gyan Devi (dead) by L. Rs and Another. He urged that all that the beneficiary was required to do was to seek the leave of the Appellate court to prefer an appeal. An application for the grant of such a leave having been filed in the instant cases, this Court could and ought to grant the requisite permission especially when the enhancement granted by the Reference Court was manifold of the amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. On the question of payment of Court fee, Mr. Rao submitted that a plain reading of section 48 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1958, left no manner of doubt that Court fee was payable only in cases where the appellant was the owner of the land and was seeking award of a further amount before the Appellate Court. The appellant in the instant cases was not according to mr. Rao claim ing any amount nor could any such claim be maintainable since it was not the owner of the land. On a true and correct interpretation of section 48, the liability to pay Court fee could according to Mr. Rao arise only in cases where the appeals were preferred by the landowners against the orders made by the Reference Court. In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon a Division Bench of this Court in Executive Engineer, karnataka Housing Board Division, Belgaum v Babu Krishna Waskar and others.

( 3 ) THE question whether an appeal can be maintained by the beneficiary of an acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act is indeed concluded by the decision of the Supreme Court in U. P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad's case, supra. The majority opinion in the said case declared:"in case, the amount of compensation has been enhanced by the court and no appeal is filed by the Government, the local authority if adversely affected by such enhancement may file an appeal with the leave of the Court. This right of the local authority does not depend on its being impleaded as a party in the proceedings before the Reference court. Even if the local authority is not impleaded as a party before the reference Court it can file an appeal against the award of the reference Court in the High Court after obtaining leave if it is prejudicially affected by the award. In case the Government files an appeal against the enhancement of the award the local authority is entitled to support the said appeal and get itself impleaded as a party. When the person having an interest in the land files an appeal in the high Court against the award of the Reference Court and seeks enhancement of the amount of compensation