High Court Karnataka High Court

Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs Sri Appusab Shrimant Balikai on 25 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs Sri Appusab Shrimant Balikai on 25 November, 2008
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao& Gowda
 

\IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA, CIRCUKEVBEQICH
AT DHARWAI).   

DATED THES THE 25TH DAY OF N{)V';3.§\§'I':"»~}"a:§.I€,iV"2i§'4()"!*3;  _ 

PRRSERT

THE HGNBLE MR.JUsT1cE1'R.RRRERDRAR  R 


THE RONRLR MR. i}T.jST1'("'3E"i§{Si§EENIVASEV' GOWQA
M.R.A§Ns; xtjakiv/2060 f&,
MFA CROB .No.99v/iV0(}f7 IN_h{I_.F{A.§ifa; 103 17/2005.

M.F.A.No.1OI§:17%2_{}()€;:.    GA  ;. 

1. KARNATAKA 1'-IEERAVARI NIGAM LTD
REP B35  MAR;-R::iNG I.)iREC'1'0R NO 1
EVCOFFEE'-BOARB BUILDING, 3 FLOOR

f '*}:)R_B R  VEEDHI

 BANG5ALQRE 1  APPELLANT

 (Rs:-,§%%i'S1é:.:R*%.R§;R1KANTH.J.BHAT : V.Y.KUMAR)

   1. ,  SR1 ARRASAB SHRIMAN'? BALIKA1:

_ "AGE: NULL, R/O HREKUDI,
" 'TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELGAUM

KAMAL APPASAB BALIKAI
AGE: NULL, R/O HREKUDI,
TQ: CI-IIKODI, DIST: BELGAUM

4/



3. THE SPECEAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICEE§'_»VV': E 
HIDKAL DAM, HUKKERI    E

BELGAUM  1'  

(BySri.:SNHA'I'1'IFORR1R2)   D     ;
(BY 3121 C.S.PATiL, eovr. ADVOC;A'1'§i3 F'OR"RS). % _ E

MFA FILED Uls-54(:>B'.,:vGF LA" Ac;  THE'

JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19/ 1 1E/2005 PASSED IN
LAC No.29/D4 ON THE FILE--o'E THE CIVIL -JUDGE(SS)
CHIKODI, PARTLY' =.. £$'LL*:)"Z1.NC}._   REFERENCE
PETYFION FOR ENHANCED CQMPEN.SA'I'ION.

MFACROB ND  0zi*kA2;D{;Ef?  120317 OF goes.

BE'I'WEEN:'        

1. SR1"APPASAB§iA:SHi1%IMAN'F"BALH{AI
AGED   E
OCQ;A.GRICtTLTURIS3'i3,

R/A'? §~£1lREi€U}"Jl VTLLAGE,
CHIKODI  v
V, .;DIsT; BELDAUM,

V.   :2; V.  Eéifmw  "1A1.« APPASAB EALIKA:

 V . D  mm-"ts,
~. " ---.VOCC;AC%RiCULTURISTS,
'  R/HI' £i;E2EKUD1 VILLAGE,
 {3H1K0D; TALUK,
IEIIST; BELGAUM.  CROSS OBJECTORS

   s N HATT} 65 K T KEWAD)

" YSND

'V.



1. KARNATAKA NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD

REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING     

NO. 1,COF'FEE BOARD BUILDINGS, _--  .-- ._ 

4TH FLOOR, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR\!Ei§)DHL  xi  
BANGALORE 1.      

2. "{'HE SPL LAND ACQUISFIION C}F'I'7'ICEI1'. * J  1
HIDAKAL DAM, "     
13:31'; BELGAUM.   RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.: sR1KANTH.J.B§i;:.T :–‘_VAV.§f;K£I_M:A1’2_F0R R1}
(By Sri.C.S.F’ATIL, GOVT. AD\»1..C.ATE ‘ Eorem)

MFA.CRQB::IN_ MI?A 1Q’;3 17/Qgs p?1L§,b 11/ O.XLI RULE
22 cm AG,g;a5;s5;.%% JUDC3:ME1\”I””& AWARD DATED

19/ 11/2Q_Q5″PA”S’*SED IN LAC.N0.,:29/04 ON THE FILE OF
THE CIVIL *JUDGQSD)»._’cmKOD1, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE ‘:§eE1?ERE1*z~CE% _ *1?-‘ETi*rION FOR ENHANCED
c0MPENsA’§’IoN 85 FURTHER ENHANCEMENT

OF’ COMPEN_SA’vTION}’.. = .

.. cross objections coming 0:1 for

f V ” ‘i’;ea2″‘in”g day, “‘S7REEEHAR RAG, J., delivered the

JUDGBENT

AA [ I.Av. §i’o.2 is afiowed. Delay of 220 days in filing the

condoned.

%/

Sri V.Y.Kt.1mar takes notice for The Kamataka
Niravari Nigam Ltd anti Sri C.S.Pati1, takes

Government.

The claimants’ Land acquji§éVd” ‘0i\ ‘ T, A’

consfiuction of a canal. The

at the rate of Rs.25,000/- “Ti1_c§ ‘Court:
has considered the viémds ‘ vigfiioiéfntial and
wanted compensation 128.12/~ and
Rs.15/- mi” Nigam Ltd. (for

short, I appeal challenging the

compensation excessive and aiso contend that

the” Vipotcntial. The ciajmants have filed

V. seeking enhancement of the

the rate of Rs.1’7/- per sq. fi.

The award of the LAO éiscieses that the

” ‘A :–.:<:)pi11i9n bf the panchas Show that the vaiue of the {and

: between Rs.25,000/- and Rs.32,000/~ per acre.

T " "The LAO has reiiad upon the sales stafisfics of the lands

sold in the years 1997 ta 1999 which are prior to the

l

notification. The sales stafistics disclose

are sold at Rs.25,000/– to Rs.32,000/-_.~~pef::~ecsc.«.A

lands are dry lands. The Value $91' 'V:.'{jhe '

dxy lands of Hirekudi village oozes Rs:.' £';:3'.,c()(:)VQ %

acre for the relevant year. I ' V

3. The C1aiII.;li;fiif,S,A VA hand, have
produced the records 115311.163 bearing RS
Nos.393/3,_ / L213/3, 328/1 and RS
No.4«09 __of converted for Non-

Ag~icuia;.u-ai ‘. saié lands adjoin the lands in

question. have also produced evidence to

_ ShOV.§§gf.V1}é5.t is converted to NoI:1-Agtricultural

pI;;rp;oseVA_, sites are formed by one Padalale, each site

is sold for Rs.-47,000/-. The sale deed

;_or p:1.otzNVo.2 (§: dated. 17.2.1999 is marked as Ex.P.29. The

V’ V’ notification in respect of the land in question

in the year 2001. Survey No.309 is within the

V sfijiage limits of Hirekudi village. However, on perusal of

the certified copy of the village map produced discloses

%/

that RS No.388 is situate immsdiateiy

Miraj read. The said Land is nearer to.

I-Iirekudi. The sale deed also

situate about 4 kms away ‘ *’

adjoins Chikkodi .- Mira} road} qfissfion are
situate far off from {the North.

4. recorés to Show
that ths question have been
canveffgzd purpose. The said lands are

also situgzs to thewgstjcmkmn ~ Mira} Road, quite far

awajffrom Wésfi_ <:) f' Cilikkoéi – Miraj Road, and they are

H in the middle between Hirekudi village and

__1\ii_ii'%§j Road. Censidcring the location of RS

V –V No.§38 lands in qucsfion, We find that RS No.388

'' .ha's-._:ac :N comparison to the lands in question. The

— have also not produced any material to show

” Etxat in the NA converted lands any plots have been formed

and sols. The Reference Court has mainly relied upon the

‘fik,

7
sale deed Ex.P.29 pertaimng to RS Ne.388 to determine
the value. If the said decument is excluded, there is
absolutely no credible material to assess the marketjllvalue

of the lands in question.

5. There is no materiai eit11e:°~’***;r;I:;j;y » “tcj «./sheiwg

whether the NA converted laritds

petential or that the con’¢ersio:1s’~,_ai3’eV I1:¥,e1}.i;;)1.;lVe.t,edliI1:l’

anticipation. of the acquisitieti;-.,:_ ‘ET1_j1ere”i~sl_ ebselntely no
credible material avsfialfle ‘~.o::t.l.»’;f’eeejV1*r1i”tfor this Court to

detemiiI1e__ _§«.1_;st __ proper compensation. The
claimants-.have 335:5′ fllfiifltl convincing evidence to prove

the 4:;§n”arAket value; Qniy one witness is examined and

placed on Ex.§’.29, the sale deed of a. plot

View of the paucity of evidence, we do

V –V r;etlRfeel is guest and proper to speculate in fixing the

K Lznaikuetvyiralue of the lands in question in the interests of

and interests of the parties. It is just arid

” Eieeessary that the order of the Reference Court is 120 be set

aside, the matter to be remanded to the Reference Court

for flesh consideration and disposa} in accordance with

_ law. The parties are permitted to adduce further’ Veiriféence

in the matter.

6. Keeping in View the faet that” =

time has eiapsed and the pafi’§ie-;.~}— ‘jo._f_’A »e~;e

compensation, we direct _V as}-ar1V’ inte;fi;:%;1’v.,t:3;eé:;s11I'<–:u;,L'

KNNL shall deposit 5.2 T_ rate of
Rs. 1,50,00()/~ per aci'e"– made 'by the
LAO ix} each case, Jada within four

weeks.7._ 'arefiésrmitted to Withdraw the amount

depositezis. It the Reference Court shafl

disgmfiee of the within three months.

that the Reference Court need not be

of the factual observations made

V –V regai*'d.ir1g. tfie location ef the lands and the market

" 'V " and ail other contentions are kept open.

is further clarified that in respect of each case if

KNNL has already deposited a sum of Rs.1,50,000/– per

acre, no further deposit be made.

4/

In both appeal and cross–obje(:{ions,

entitled to refund of Court fee.

nvb.