Lakamma, Seenappa and Rangadasappa vs Special Land Acquisition Officer, Karnataka Housing Board, The Commissioner, Karnataka Housing Board and Rangappa

N.K. Patil, J.—These appeals by the Appellants are directed against the impugned judgments and award dated 22/02/2005 passed in LAC No. 140/1995 (in MFA No. 4076/2003) and dated 11/06/2003 passed in LAC. No. 189/2001 (in MFA No. 4872/2004) on the file of the II Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore (CCH-17), (hereinafter referred to as ''the Reference Court'' for short).

The Reference Court by the impugned judgments and award, has fixed the market value at Rs. 2,04,732/- per acre in both the petitions. Not being satisfied with the market value fixed by the Reference Court, the Appellants have presented this appeal for further enhancement of compensation.

The brief facts of the case are:

Land bearing Sy. No. 172/1 measuring 4 acres 10 guntas and 8 guntas of karab in MFA No. 4076/2003 and land bearing Sy. No. 205/10(p) measuring 02 acres in MFA No. 4372/2004, both situated at Kengeri village and Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk, belonging to the Appellants have been notified and acquired by the State in favour of first Respondent for formation of house sites, vide Preliminary Notification dated 15.10.1989 issued u/s 4(1) of L.A. Act, followed by final notification. After issuing notices under Sections 9 and 10 of the L.A. Act, calling objections from the land owners, the Land Acquisition Officer has passed the award, fixing the market value at Rs. 45,000/-per acre and Rs. 22,500/- per acre for karab in both the petitions. Not being satisfied with the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Appellants have filed claim petitions u/s 18(1) of L.A. Act, seeking enhancement before the Reference Court in LAC No. 140/1995 and LAC No. 189/2001 respectively. The said claim petitions had come up for consideration before the Reference Court. The Reference Court, in turn, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence and other materials available on file, taking into consideration the nature and potentiality of the lands in question and placing reliance on Ex.P1 produced by the claimants in respect of the land notified and acquired in the year 1966, has fixed the market value at Rs. 2,04,732/- per acre. Being aggrieved by the said judgments and award passed by the Reference Court, the Appellants herein felt necessitated to present these appeals for further enhancement of compensation.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellants and learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

After careful evaluation of the original records available on file at threadbare, including the impugned judgments and award passed by the Reference Court, it is manifest on the face of the impugned judgments and award that, the Reference Court has committed an error of law, much less material irregularity in passing the said judgments, which has resulted in mis-carriage of justice. It is the specific case of the Appellants that, they have filed application u/s 18(1) of L.A. Act for enhancement of compensation against the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, contending that, in respect of the lands which have been notified and acquired for the same purpose, this Court has fixed the market value at Rs. 2,04,732/- per acre with statutory benefits and the lands in question have been notified and acquired for the same purpose and their lands are also equally fit for formation of sites and the Land Acquisition Officer has failed consider this aspect of the matter while fixing the market value and prayed to fix the market value which was prevailing as on the date of issuance of preliminary notification i.e. in the year 1989. The specific ground taken by the Appellants has not been considered by the Reference Court. The Reference Court ought to have determined the just and reasonable market value, taking into consideration the year of the issuance of preliminary notification u/s 4(1) of L.A. Act, but there is no consideration regarding this aspect by the reference Court and also with regard to the oral and documentary evidence produced by them, including their case as per their written statements. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the impugned judgments and award passed by the Reference Court cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside without going further into the merits and demerits of this case and the matters require reconsideration by the Reference Court.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeals filed by the Appellants are allowed in part.

The impugned judgments and award dated 22/02/2003 passed in LAC No. 140/1995 (in MFA No. 4076/2003) and dated 11/06/2003 passed in LAC. No. 189/2001 (in MFA No. 4872/2004) passed by the Reference Court are hereby set aside and the matters stand remitted back to the Reference Court, with a direction to reconsider the same afresh and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with relevant provisions of the L.A. Act, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Appellants and Respondent personally or through their counsel.

It is open for the parties to adduce or produce their additional evidence, if any, to substantiate their case.

If such applications are filed by the parties, the Reference Court is directed to receive the same and proceed further in accordance with law and dispose of the same, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and award.

In view of remanding the matter to the Reference Court, the Registry is directed to refund the court fee paid by the Appellants, it if is permissible in law.

Draw the award, accordingly.