High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 04 KAR CK 0013

The Special Land Acquisition Officer K.R. Project Parakalamata Buidling Mysore 570001 vs P. Shivanna

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 17 April 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ram Mohan Reddy, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Second Appeal No. 15 of 2011 (LA) A/w Miscellaneous Cvl. No. 15727 of 2011

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 557 words

Ram Mohan Reddy

1.

Heard on Miscellaneous application. Accepting the cause shown, delay of 110 days in filing the appeal is condoned.

Application is accordingly allowed.

0.02 guntas of land in Sy. No. 262/2 of Doddakatoor Village. Jayapura Hobli, Mysore Taluk, amongst other small extents of land when acquired by the state government in exercise of its eminent domain power to wit for "Varuna Nala" by issuing a preliminary notification dt. 25/2/1999 under Sec. 4(l) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ''the Act'', followed by a final notification under Sec. 6(1) on 7/1/2005, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, based on sales statistics, fixed the market value of the acquired land at 35,000/- per acre, by award dt. 16/ 12/2006. The land loser''s application under Sec. 18 (i) of the Act for enhancement of compensation when referred to the III Addl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) Mysore, was registered as LAC No. 927/07 and clubbed along with LAC No. 113/08, also for enhancement of compensation in respect of immovable properties acquired under the very same preliminary and final notifications for the very same public purpose. The claimants adduced common evidence in LAC No. 927/07 by examining the claimant in the said Reference as PW-1 and marked one document as Ex. P1. The Land Acquisition Officer did not lead evidence, however the general award and individual awards were marked as Ex. R1 to R3, by consent. The Civil Court having regard to the undisputed fact that the 0.02 guntas of land since acquired, was within the limits of Doddakatoor Village while several other lands acquired for the very same purpose were also in the same village, under the very notifications, subject matter of Reference in LAC No. 809/07, whence the market value of the acquired lands was enhanced to 2,32,000/- per acre, and, following the opinion of this Court in Bhima Singh & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Another AIR 2003 SC 4382 holding that - the rate of compensation for all the acquired lands similarly situated in the adjoining villages cannot be found fault with and liable to be confirmed, therefore, by judgment and award dated 20/4/2009, allowed the Reference and enhanced the market value of the acquired land to 2,32,000/- per acre.

2.

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, aggrieved by the judgment and award, preferred LACA No. 47/2010 before the Principal District Judge at Mysore, who by judgment dated 20/7/2010, having found no merit, dismissed the appeal. Hence, this second appeal.

3.

The only contention advanced by the learned HCGP for the appellant is that the land measuring 0.02 guntas in Doddakatoor Village is not similar to the lands subject matter of LAC No. 809/07, though the lands are situated in the very same village, acquired under the very same notifications and for the very same public purpose of forming Varuna Nala.Having heard the learned HCGP, perused the pleadings and examined the judgment and award of the Courts below, in the absence of any distinct material brought on record in the evidence, both oral and documentary, before the reference court, this court cannot hasten to conclude that the acquired lands did not offer a comparable value in particular, when the award earlier passed in LAC No. 809/07, has already attained finality.

No substantial question of law arise for decision making and the appeal is accordingly dismissed.