HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
JANHAVI W/O NARAYAN KATTI – Appellant
Versus
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER – Respondent
MFA.CROB/100118/2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
M.F.A.CROB. No.100118/2014 (LAC)
BETWEEN
JANHAVI W/O NARAYAN KATTI,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O. AIANAPUR, TQ: ATHANI,
DIST: BELGAUM
.....CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI M.C.HUKKERI)
AND
1.
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
HIPPARAGI PROJECT ATHANI,
2.
THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
KARNATAKA NEERAWARI NIGAM LTD.
W AND M SUBDIVISION ATHANI,
DIST: BELGAUM.
…..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI V.S. KALASURMATH, HCGP FOR R-1
SRI RAMESH N MISALE, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22
OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.04.2010
PASSED IN LAC No.7/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN)
ATHANI,
PARTLY
ALLOWING
THE
CLAIM
PETITION
FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS CROSS OBJECTION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
- 2 -
JUDGMENT
Cross-objector being aggrieved by the judgment and
award dated 24.04.2010 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.)
Athani, in L.A.C.No.7/2007, filed this cross-objection seeking for
enhancement of compensation.
2.
Parties are referred to as per their rankings before
the reference Court.
3.
Brief facts of the case of the claimant is that the
claimant was the owner of land bearing R.S.No.607/1 measuring
1 acre 17 guntas and R.S.No.607/2 measuring 34 guntas of
Ainapur
village,
Taluk
Athani,
Dist:
Belagavi.
The
first
respondent issued preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of
the Land Acquisition Act (‘the Act’, for short) and published in
gazette on 06.01.2005. The first respondent passed an award on
22.08.2006 fixing the market value of the land at Rs.1,49,121/-
per acre with all other statutory benefits. The cross-objector/
claimant, being dissatisfied with the market value fixed by the
first respondent, filed an application under Section 18(1) of the
Act. The first respondent referred the application to the
- 3 -
reference Court. The reference Court registered the application
as L.A.C. No.7/2007. The respondents filed objections to the
reference application. The reference Court recorded common
evidence.
The
cross-objector/claimant
in
M.F.A.CROB.
No.100190/2014
viz.,
Mohan
Nageshwarrao
Huilgol
was
examined as PW-1 and got marked documents at Exs.P-1 to P-
129. The reference Court allowed the application in part and on
considering the material on record, re-determined the market
value at Rs.3,69,000/- except phot kharab. The cross-objector/
claimant being dissatisfied with the re-determination of the
market value by the reference Court has filed this cross-
objection seeking enhancement of compensation.
4.
Heard the learned counsel for cross objector, learned
H.C.G.P. for first respondent and learned counsel for second
respondent.
5.
Learned counsel for cross objector/claimant submits
that the reference Court has committed an error in not
considering Ex.P-119 which is the copy of the sale deed wherein
a plot in Sy.No.609/1+2A-1+2B was sold for Rs.34.000/-. If the
- 4 -
acquired land is converted into square feet, it comes to Rs.21.60
paise per square feet. The reference Court re-determined the
market value at Rs.18/- per square feet which is on the lower
side. He further submits that the respondent No.2 had filed an
appeal in M.F.A.No.20181/2011 and it was withdrawn by the
respondent No.2. Hence, he prays to allow the cross-objection.
6.
Per contra, learned counsel for respondents supports
the impugned judgment and award. Learned counsel for second
respondent submits that the reference Court has re-determined
the market value on higher side.
7.
Perused the records and also considered the
submissions of learned counsel for the parties.
8.
It is not in dispute that the cross objector/claimant
was the owner of land bearing R.S.N