High Court Karnataka High Court

The Spl Lao M And Mip Gulbarga vs Basavarj S/O Sidramappa on 11 September, 2009

Karnataka High Court
The Spl Lao M And Mip Gulbarga vs Basavarj S/O Sidramappa on 11 September, 2009
Author: N.K.Patil And Malimath
 

 

EN ma HIGH CQUR'? er? §<ARNAT;;£=§%_" V
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GUIJBARQ .  V 
M739 Tiiis THE um mp-§g9VV{3V1V:§f's§;§';'E?;1$z£VI§%§VEV'2:'??
PRESE§T',V V'   V'V V
THE H€3?§'BLE    V
L ;AN$VV§ '  A  V
THE: HON'i?-LéVM;?.J{;.E%"§?§Cf:§.V:fi3§§3i'  I*_v'£ALiMf&"FH
V §;§'VIV§«'V¥§§V§§,"}.$%é§?'1V\i'2§€i§2VtLAc)

  . A  AfiND  
1.

. ¢_:gJ;E’A«.q;f§<).E:__.;"%_:3.; 2004 Ms:

zamr;i§E:.V54V§2_1{é$:'?G2.V§.V.V___ % % V

W' «-

.’v E

V V ‘ …:xsz,; .13: jggagmggsas

{:3 ‘.

V

V ” “3iT’H§ $?’Ex::V:;§i, Lfigfiflg A€QU§S§’§’I€§§\E
.::}¥§§£CER, m~e*g,’~M:P GUE,E£EC’%fia.,

f;*:»z£i:E§<:':.::U':'§v*s ENGIKEER,
..5 APP§LLfi;F~€'E'S

={§§y'=$7R:.M.KuMA§, AGA}

BAS§i'§?&RAJ
Sfili SEBRz%MAF'?'A

E}E"'x.'EE"§fiRAPPA,
S ,1' G S§*§ARAE*ziE§P?fi

Kw.)

B“‘§’Ei 352:3 M;%.}{}R§ R/Q “‘~fE’.§~I§.E£’¢ITS

(E3? SEE Sé3.SAJJAN SHESETY, §s.D’J.,}

$3123 MFA 18 page arzszingzé-‘S’§:’;’;*::;r§:’ $x;g::;”e’::F i,;;:’; A_ 1A??’1’k4,9;;*:j’rzgs:”:;:;L>
ax: use §~z<1:=:»2<:;;§28 0?: ma Ema §«”V*j:’E»e’§:; E ADSL, {fi’x§Ei,’.=.4}I}E)¥i§§4′:.,«

gsm:sNj;, GTJLBARGA, PAR’fT:::5*–..;,LL<::'s,a?INC: ':T"§:iE~:v~.i._;:.1EE%E:–~:%E1~é<_:2"

?E3TiTT£{i%N 130;? gmaaycga :vz}.r3:a:;~zsm*;::rs;i —
Mm casss-a3JEc*r:i§o*H’_ 3 13 }é;)§i3§; . ‘ – .. A

BETWEEN:

E. 3AS&’J&Rfi;I_ V
3/0 $’§B%?f::¥
Sf?)

B{j;%”}7’Z%§ 3£§§§3i zs5A§;2::§;*~§2,*§:fi'””2$é:=ié<:;x'§'§2§;§~::ké£;§,
<'f:§§§_BAE%€;i:;».-55;; '£'ALU.'%3i 8J%",-€iL"E'<L3E¥S

" " _ A $;'3.,4sAsk:A:%éé§:§r§'?Y, Ami;

" .1 *§*§«':V'*:§'j_§.i3E;8:A1j .i:%N§ Afff;QUiS§"§'§QE\§

, ;i;'r*.§4§RSLE2Q{H?CR3A$&§$¥”
THE3fiDfiMEWFAN§aWfiRD§%TED1?42fi&2@%£EDENéfifi.*
N@5@y@80NTHEEmacmT%E:AmDL«mvuHnnm$msg3§;*’
GULBARC%h PARTLY ALLounN@ ?HE REFERENC§*PE?fi§ON'”,
$09 ENHANCED CoM?ENsgmsN AwB.sam§NG>§aR?HaRa

ENHgNcEM€N?<nr¢oMPENS§maN.g _A~

MFA ANS CROSS4MH¥fl€ON AQ§,c0§§fiG"©N"géR

HESERENG TE-HS §)§s,Y, I'%'.K.P£:;'!_'1§.«_V J. BEIEJEVVEEQEQVV YES
§'QLL@WING:–

.__.t._…_’..;……………………………

avnemfififfl

gaa 5491×2002 jsf§a§§#£;’égg$§g the Connnan
judgment pa$seé in
LAC éigf £11:-2 8I}1011I1t awardeci
by the is;_’vv”e5«;_n (311 {ha gre:3u:1§ 333$ tha

°23,’mé’2–_1:1g’» a§x2g3″d€é iiiafiequaia 311% mquixes fer

L.§::§:a::<r<:;}i:1¢::t§ " '_.

“$316 brisf facts of tha €8.86 are as feiloxsssz

he Eazzfi baaréng S3: Nofigj 12?; measurizlg 2 a<:ms ef

' {gig iand situatefi at Venkatbensfiur vifiaga, Gulbarga fiisiirict

bag 2966;: 11«:}tified and acquimd E3? the Stats Gaverzzment

thmugh tha Sgeaéai Land Acquisiiion; {)ff:s:':ei; Ev? & M.§.R5

%W

I

Gtiibarga, for construction cf Khaji Khatxaoar Wat.3f'-

The preimlilfzsary notificatisn was isstzaé under j5'–E:.{__1§-'~'.<§i' _

the Lazici Acquifiitien Act {far shor'£mfffi1e Aci;.'}"a:3i:§d W

was p1z¥:s}isht::d in the Céazatte daisgd 30$. 'f0flefi,z§;§

{he final nefificaiion iss11::<iV»Ti1a:;;;§:z~::' VS§:pfi0n

The Lmid Acqlgisifion {}ffit§ficatim’:–Ex.P1’7 issued by the Jurisd.iCt£0I1ai Cemgfitctnt

atzthority and further ease erf the appellants is ~

ciaeiuction towazds cost of cuitivation is {aka} at’§”:0°x€§”iifsteés.ci =

of 499/?) in msyect {Eff the dry land’ .7I7T’1_c_:41’vE:i:'{;;1″€:’, K V’

suhmittsd that $336 judgment arid ;:§a*3S:£é:.:i ‘

Reference Caurt is Bahia 1:0 ‘¥:3e’*-.mo{iifieci

masanabifi cemptinsafiun.

3. The stzbmiéaiszx Bf “Ic”:éIf1f{:~:1_ counséi far this

cmsswebjaciars Vatvtha 1011′: -S3? Reference (hurt

has a taking the yieleti of Tur at
4 quixztiéfi par acfié 6 Quinta} per acre as per thfi

yielci -*::ert§fi§;’£&?¢V- 1% iééueé bf; the Juzfisdictiozzal at1th0ri*.;y

tgixe £§g;jcuiVtiiVi*é§1 D€partme:}t§ Guiharga. He fuzfizer

t4 ¥f1a:%.,”_’_.tI3.€ Refemnee {fiourt committed an error in

gi’r_iiig at 53″/Ea {awards Cast 0f cuitivatian which

Caiifléstv 13.5: sugtamable. Qniy 40″/e can he takmz for the dry

‘Z”h€rsfor&, he submitiéé that, the award gasseé by

$15 Reffirancfi fietzrt has ‘E9 136 medifieé by awarding just and

masanable fiompsnsatia

4. Per coxztra, learned AGA for the appe}}:f1:ii§§_;’–«¥%ii€:tf:1′

alia, cantendad and substantiated the judgmegifi

passed by the Reference Court as.§u»s.4:_ ;;;1c?=’ é,VIVl?1′ d()’e=;§” ” .

not call fear intexfemnce by this ” hits:

fairly submitttid that the yislfi. i{:sWa1’ds L’

par acre which is not ‘x__Thg:j’ jfi$ t” gfiopez’ yield
is 6 quintai par ffy&i.je’14ii–VL’V§g%f£3ficate–Ex.P14 and
ftlrther submitfittrj that tcwaltls cost of
cz11t:ivati<31:::«*V __ V' fiééftnot be sustaixmable.
The " wbe 40'/o. Hence, he

d.isp£;e1e.::_ _ % '

AMINO

tin VV5. the lerarneci AGA appearing for

;_a:1Q}21:}1a:1A{'$ ] rsszpfindents ané. the learned counsel

a}§;3€5:::tjit;g"~ §'<)r the: claimantsfcrosswebjectors at a

'Q iengtt1 of time.

,.–

50. After car:-afai corzsideration of the su’i::miss’i0ns

‘ ‘mfide by {ha 3:’CSptE:C’EiV€ counsel, the 9:113’ point that arises fer

: cansidaiation is:

L

/

“Whether the armmnt awarded by the Referenqe Court

is just and praper?”

7. After carefu} evaluation of the ‘.

reccrrtis, What emerges is that, _§3:ae__ Refei’éziCé._v i§_£1$ _

committal a grave ermr and proésed;%;d~’io f2.::;s’s _theV@:{rd1éVi?.Tl::>§;

taking the yicid of T111″ as 4 ;;;’i3§1::ta1″é1<:I'(5:»b.:'(f£j»v:;;'i;z?a;jf,?–v3to Vthsti *

Yield Certficate-Ex.P14, whe;f{§}i1.. -32$ sp§éCii7ic§§l1}rV?st.ated that
the maximum yiaid pa-fV:Vh¢c'§_ar<2;f guptas and minimum

yield per hectare is g1.;;;1::a§s.A& of the matter

has pegs ggfieeéea :9 take the yieki of "Fur
at 4 ,;":a.3::3:1oi be justifiable. Therefere,
we can :$3fg:;3§;v £fié'z;:§€mge yitzld of Tut at 6 Quinta} per
I» 2 _____

Tribunal has further ca-mmitted an anothrssr

* ciiror deduction 0f 30% towards cast of cultivation

cf efiry land, which carmot be sustainaizzie.

, A' 'i'§!§re§§m5 we take {.116 COS'{ of cultivation at 409%»

i. The yieid of Jowar is taken at 6 Quinta} per acre

as gar E3xrP}4~ yield (373 ' Gate and the price list as §€I'

.»no*""""W-Mm'

EXPIS. The pf'iC€3S of Jowar and Tur is Rs.6Si5}'–.: anéi

Rs.22SO] ~ per quintal respeciivelyz Thertifozwe, fiif

quinta} Jowar at the rate of Rs.650/ ~ per
Rs.3,900[~ anti fxirmer if we €133

price czf 4 {tart load Jawar Fodder rate» ;,§;AE?s,,'~.b:pt:~rV

cart load, tbs total amcnmt cages ta {lg,§3j{}(:,_/ $6

far as Jawar is concemgé.

In so far a§;V_’§’uV1f ii; c:§;)née:méfc.1,._ -the rah: of T121″ is

Rs.2,2::’3G/ – a11:i””Ehé”3ri€i{i =is:..i:%;1ken at 6 quinta} per

acre, ‘thm. L ‘the i;gm1″ — ~sr_;:t33″*a€$” ti§ ‘ R3. 13,599; » (Rs-..225€}X 5
q:1i1it:;*::_§).” V the neat amount Comes its
E1’3.18,4~fi§(3fi¥ par’ acrij. S of this, 46% is éeéucied towards

c’g2£ivai{io:1.;….£§1en the amauxzt cames ta Rs.11,040/-

‘ multiplier appiicabk; is; ’10’ and; if the samé is

” cemes to Rs.1,2(},4(}O_!»~ per acre ifistsaé of

R§.3;55′;{);0{};l~ per amt awagzdsd by the Refftmnce Ceurt.

9, in the iight caf thé facts and Ci.¥°C”{l}3iStaIiC€S of 11118

case as statsfi above, the apspeai filed by 11136: appallants 11$

éismissed as écvofi of 11:1 ‘:8 and the cmssvohjectiems filed

by the ciajmants stamis dispeséed of by

commen. judgmént and award passed by thr: Rt.”;’i!f(f;::*I'{‘:I;_1:’¢E’3.’:..:”3v£T}*¥_:J.;.E”!l’

in so far as it relates ta Sy.No.99f2A»V 150 an ‘é:§<;;'1?§i*§'::{£; (sf "2 a cr:c*3 K x

holéing that the croa-;s~object0rs lam

R31, 10,40(}/- per acre as ag2ii;i'st R$.'3fi,V:(}Q{:§;[; g

10. The crassk;-hjactafié ‘1i:f:’3;”mitt:é(i” iié pay the

cleficit Court fee regarding.’1§i1éL’v’e§{1§1at3§6:5§.ja:i3z;gount within ‘Ewe

weeks from fnsday’_’–an€i_ u§.i::jfa~”3<§tr:d to accejgt the I

same: and éfiéraw tiié ..g1écQi*dii3.g1jg Q

sd/-*
JUDGE

%%%%% gé/u
3333

‘?£,Er;rn V ‘ ”