High Court Karnataka High Court

Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs Sri Bhimarao Revappa Huddar on 25 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs Sri Bhimarao Revappa Huddar on 25 November, 2008
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao& Gowda
 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, 

AT DHARVVAD.

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY  é'e;)_;3_   M' x

PREs13:N?r  3
THE HON'BLlE-1 MR.JUSTI§3E K. 

AND'A  kk

THE HONBLE MR. 3115 k  GOWDA

 

KARNATAKA; N.EEi?.A'.?AE%.I NIGAM LTD

REPRE'-SEN'I'ED' BY i*!'S-33/ik'aN"AGiNG DIRECTOR

No.1, COFFEE £30--ARI3---.I3i?fl.DING,

4TH FLOOR, DR.B.R.,AMBEDKAR

VEEDBE, BANGALORE 01  APPELLANT

 1'(B§f§1i;§§RiK5NTHv;f';BHAT : V.Y.KUMAR)

 1.

S}§I’;.BHiMARAO REVAPPA HUDDAR
A. Age: null

. _ O HIRKUDI TALUK, CI-IIKODI
‘ “DISTRICT: BELGAUM

‘ SR1 MAHADEV REVAPPA HUDDAR

Age: null
R/O HIRKUDI TALUK, CHIKODI
DISTRICF: BELGAUM

3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER ETf e
HIDKAL DAM, * I

TALUK: IriU7£<}~{ERI.

(Ey 811.8 N HATE’: FOR R1 &R2); A
(By SR1 C.S.PA’l’1L, eovr. ADVO,(__3A’}fEe.FO’R R3′)

MFA EILED U/S.54(§.)”–vE.’I:.(3:E*3′ LA ‘ACT: f:\C§AINs’I’ THE

JUDGMENT AND AWARD EATEI3 25/3,’2oo6 EASSED IN
LAC No.12/05 ON THE FILE’ 01? THE CIV1L’JUDGE(SD)
CHIKODI, PARTLY EL;Lo\InzIN<3Ij ATFHE REFERENCE
PE'I'I'I'I()N FOR ENHANCED COMPE NSjA'_I'_I.ON.

This_ e.:n__ 3″n_g. en, hearm g this day,
SREEDHAIR R39, J;-, .{I’eI:Ireree– t1*;e’fol1mviI1g: ~–

amen

I.A.1’IQ.’.2.’_ie” De1ay of 46 days in filing the

apgciai c0z1d<)§1e%é.,vv' _____

,- .. $";Pe.til takes notice for the Government.

H " (claimants) land acquired for the

efyconstzmction of a canal. The LAO awarded

V' Ie em–peIIsation at the rate of Rs.25,000/~ per acre. The

' Réeference Court has considered the lands as having NA

'4 potential and ganted compensation at the rate of Rs.11/—,

3/

Rs. 12/- and Rs.15/~ per sq.fi:. Toe

Nigam Ltd. (for short, 'KNNL') hz_aJs,Vfi_1ed s;ppegu: ciaaum-mg

the compensation granted as ejcceesive az_1d~ fcoxisiend

that the land has no NA poiemgaz. L A

2. The awarjd of VA that the
opinion of the value of the land
ranges 135,000/~ per acre.

T115 LAC’ of the lands
sold which are prior to the
notifieafiofx.’ iijsifgxfisfics disciose that the lands

are %so1d%a::% Rsokesgooeof’; to Rs.32,000/~ per acre. The

V’ _ The value for the registration of the

aix-ekudi village is fixed at Rs.33,000/- per

for. ‘felevant year.

” The claimants, on the other hand, have

‘produced the records to Show that the lands bearing RS

;:~zos.393/3, 451/1, 395/2, 394/23, 213/3, 323/1 and RS

No.4()9 of Himkuéi viflage are converted for Non»

Ag’iou}turaJ purpose. The said lands adjoin the lands in

C£X.

questicn. The ciaimants have also ‘to

show that RS No.388 is convsrted to

purpose, house sites are formed Otis T

measllring 30′ x 40′ is sold fm:Rs.4′?,§)so masses _

of plot No.20 dated 17.2. Ths
preliminary question
is issued in theyfear ::20{hi_3}. is Withifl the
village fimjtsficfisszver, on perusal of
the pmduced discloses
that No’.isitfizasfisixnmediately adjoining Ch’1kkodi–

Miraj rdeid_._ * T1i<:_ W is nearer to Chikkodi than

«Q *r1ies~s§a;¢_&1eed also recites that RS Ns.388 is

'situat<::_ ___4 ms away from fiimkudi village and

– Miraj road. The lands in question are

sits’ate:”V from Chikkodi ~ Mira} Road to the North-

if West,

‘ 4. The claimants have produced records to show

that the lands ad}’0iI1ix1g the lands in qfiesfion have been

converted to Non-Agiclfitural purpose. The said lands are

Cg/A

5
also situate to the West of Childcodi ~—- Miraj Road, quite far

away from West of Chikkodi — Mira} Road, and they are

almost situate in the middle between

Chikkodi -~ Miraj Road. Considering the

1330.388 and the lands in questiori,iAAiVe’f}n:d i7 A’

has no comparison to the Ql~.1€Stio§\

claimants have also not proéllced short}
that in the NA eonve1″ted. slots haiéel been formed
and sold. The relied upon the

sale deed. to RS No.388 to determine

the valuéj tl1oV;«1_aid.:_”..’id0cument is excludeci, there is

V. A’ &b$’Lfi11tfi_§l}i ;1o erediiqle» material to assess the market value

V’V of’ the question.

Q’V’V’Tl?.$”3r€ is no material either way to Show

f_»wherlaer’«;_tlie NA converted lands do really have NA

5.’ or that the conversions are manipulated in

i’ arztieipation of the acqtlisiition. There is absolutely no

Credible material available on record for this Court to

determine the gust and proper compensation. The

, ‘_ in ttxiatteri ” V

ciaimants have also not let in convincing evidence» t;;q.~ o~;¢

the market value. Only one witness

heavy reliance is placed on Ex.P. ;saie* at

in RS No. 388. In View of t}’1e__.pat1’ci;ty of e$.’it}ef1ce, *’

not feel that it is just and the
market value of the taterests of
justice and inte1fests_.»~ef It is just and
necessary Court is to be set
aside, to the Reference Court
for disposal in accordance with
law. to adduce further evidence

Kétipilig in View the fact that a considerable

and that the parties are denied of the

cointpeiisation, We direct that as an interim measure,

V’ ‘(f “shall deposit compensation at the rate of

t §€s.1,50,000/- per acre inclusive of the award made by the

LAO in each case. The deposit to be made Within four

weeks. Claimants are perrnitteé to Withdraw the amount

deposited. It is directed that the RefereI1ceV”‘(§£}’g:;.t§§§’VV«’:~;::1:ia}i

dispese of the case within three months. _. ~ V ix” 4

It is clarified that the Rereremxg e

influenced by any of the -4fact1Aia:1_””

regarding the locatien of market
potential. All the contefifierfie open. H ‘A
It is fmtherv of each case if
KNNL has Rs. 150,000/– per
acre,
12¢-.i:*;;nde
Judge

Sd/~
Tudge

nvb. 2