SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

MFA No.103210/2014

C/W.

MFA CROB. NO.100173/2015 (LAC)

IN MFA NO.103210/2014

BETWEEN

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA

DEVELOPMENT BOARD,

DHARWAD, NOW REPRESENTED BY SLAO

KIADB, DAVANGERE DIVISION,

DAVANGERE

...APPELLANT

(BY SRI.SHASHANK S HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

AND

SRI.K KAKUBAL SETTY S/O LATE K LAXMAN SETTY

AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,

C/O. SRI VENKATESHWARA SILK

PALACE, MAIN ROAD,

TQ: HOSPET, DIST: BELLARY

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. LAXMAN T MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)

2

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE

L.A. ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED

19.07.2014 PASSED IN LAC NO.4/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE

PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMC HOSPET, AWARDING

THE COMPENSATION OF RS.1,27,300/- PER ACRE.

IN MFA.CROB. NO.100173/2015

BETWEEN

SRI.K. KAKUBAL SHETTY

S/O LATE K LAXMAN SHETTY

AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS

C/O.SRI.VENKATESHWAR SILK PALACE

MAIN ROAD, TQ: HOSPET

DIST: BELLARY

…CROSS OBJECTOR

(BY SRI. LAXMAN T MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE)

AND

SPECIAL AND ACQUISITION OFFICER

KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREA DEVELOPMENT BOARD

DHARWAD, REP BY SLAO

KIADB, DAVANGERE DIVISION

DAVANGERE

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.SHASHANK S HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

THIS MFA CROSS-OBJECTION IN MFA NO.103210/2014

IS UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC, AGAINST THE

JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.07.2014 PASSED IN LAC

NO.4/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND

JUDICIAL

MAGISTRATE,

FIRST

CLASS

HOSPETE,

PARTLY

ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FOR COMPENSATION

AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL AND CROSS-OBJECTION HAVING BEEN

HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR

‘PRONOUNCEMENT

OF

THIS

DAY,

ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

3

COMMON JUDGEMENT

Lands bearing Sy. No.159/1 measuring 2.73 acres,

Sy. No.160/1 measuring 1.87 acres and Sy. No.160/3

measuring 3.60 acres of Sankalapur village, Taluk Hosapet

were the subject matter of acquisition in terms of the

notification dated 12.07.1984 under Section 28(1) of the

Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act (for short, ‘the

Act) The final notification under Section 28(4) of the Act

was issued on 07.05.1987. The award under Section 11 of

the Land Acquisition Act was passed on 25.07.1996. The

Special Land Acquisition Officer deemed it fit to determine

market value at Rs.16,800.00 per acre. In addition to this,

statutory benefits were conferred.

2.

The land loser sought reference before the

Principal Senior Civil Judge at Hosapet and sought for

enhancement of compensation. On reference, the case is

numbered as LAC No.4/2002 and the Principal Senior Civil

Judge at Hosapet allowed the petition in part and

4

determined the market value at Rs.1,27,300.00 and

statutory benefits were also conferred.

3.

The beneficiary-KIADB has questioned the

judgement and award of the Reference Court by filing the

present appeal in MFA No.103210/2014. Aggrieved by the

said judgement passed by the Reference Court, the land

loser has filed MFA Cross-objection No.100173/2015

seeking enhancement of compensation.

4.

Both these cases are clubbed and heard

together.

5.

Learned counsel for the appellant-KIADB, Sri.

Shashank S. Hegde and Mrs Preeti Shashank have raised

the following contentions:

(a)

The lands in question when acquired in

1984 were situated in a rural area and the

Reference

Court

committed

an

error

in

providing a 10% escalation to the market

value of the land acquired in 1978.

5

(b)

The preliminary notification having been

published on 12.07.1984 the Reference Court

could not have taken the valuation of the land

in the year 1987 i.e., the year in which the

final notification was issued. It is urged that

the valuation as on preliminary notification i.e.,

as on 12.07.1984 should have been taken into

consideration.

6.

In support of his contention, the learned

counsel for the appellant-KIADB would place reliance on

the judgement reported in (2008) 14 SCC 745 (General

Manager ONGC vs. Ramesh Bhai). Based on these

grounds, he submits that at the most 5% to 7.5%

escalation should have been given to the lands in question

acquired under the 1978 notification and based on this he

would urge to allow the appeal.

7.

Learned counsel for the cross-objector, Sri.

Laxman T. Mantagani with all vehemence would oppose

the appeal filed by KIADB and in support of his cross-

6

objection seeking enhancement of compensation, raised

the following contentions:

(a) The Reference Court committed an error by

taking the valuation of lands acquired under

1978 notification as the basis to determine the

market value of the lands in question in the

present appeal.

(b) According to him, the lands which were the

subject matter of acquisition in 1978 are at a

distance of 6 kms from Hosapet and the lands

belonging to the cross-objector are 3 kms

away from Hosapet and the lands not being in

the vicinity of the lands which were the subject

matter of 1978 acquisition, the Reference

Court

could

not

have

determined

the

compensation based on the valuation of the

lands acquired under 1978 notification.

(c) The lands being just 3 kms away from

Hosapet town should be treated as urban land

7

and 15% escalation should have been taken to

determine the market value as against 10%

considered by the Reference Court.

(d) The commissioner appointed before the

Reference

Court

has

submitted

a

report

indicating the developments in the vicinity of

the lands in question and the report would

indicate that the lands in question are now part

of Hosapet city and even in terms of the

notification issued by the Government, the

lands are falling within the municipal limit of

Hosapet since 1997.

(e)

The

lands

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top