High Court Karnataka High Court

Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs Sri Sudarshan Aravind Chougala on 25 November, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Ltd vs Sri Sudarshan Aravind Chougala on 25 November, 2008
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao& Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT 011' KARNATAKA, CIRCUE'   %

AT DHARWAD.

DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY 01?  2rj§é;«v  kk

PRESENT: "   T 
THE HONELE MR.JUsT:-fie 
THE HONBLE MR.  GOWDA

% ~F.A.%fié<1é:373!2006 
MFA <::RQ£a_ Ngusfs/V2-06:7 ' IN Ik/i...1?';.i&;1'€<}. 10373/2005.

M.F'.A.No.  AM  ..  '

BEPWEEN . M  V

1. KARNATAKA"NEE£2AVA§RI NIGAM um
REP BYITS M;e..NzaG1:¢G IDIRECTOR
;\I_;o"1,.CoFFEE, BOARED BUHJDING, 4 FLOOR
-DR  VEEDI-Ii

  [  ..BuANAt}A!¢ (3RE 1  APPELLANT

 . my __S§'iKANTH.J.BHAT ; V.Y.KUMAR)

ANI)

  1.' n ,SRISUDARSHAI'~¥ ARAWNB CBOUGALA

 , Age: null
  HIREKUDI, CHIKODI

"   BELGAUM



2. SANTHOSHKUMAR ARAVIND CHOUGALA C  
R/O IIIREKUM, cIIII<oI:II
BELGAUM

3. SANJIV KUMAR ARAVIND CH._OUG.éLLA.t_ '   * 
Age: null V    "
R/O HIREKUDI, CE~III{O?'-'DI
BELGAUM  

4. THE SPECIAL LAND.V_AcQU'IS'fIfII§III'OFFICER
HIDKAL DAM, HIII<'_I<;'c:I2III%  I  I = 
BELGAUM   I '<}§_E_S.PONDENTS

{By Sri.: s N I~{_.,#£i**1f1:j',$.*3'OI§?, R;1» R3}~x "'--i"- I % A'

(By Sri.: C.S.P£%[I_'IL,v_  '-AD€WfCA'£'E)

MFA HF'ILE.D uS'. fi».'~V§'(1] OI?' LA AC'? AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT' AN'B'j"-.'9IWA1"2{f)""DATED 17/ 1 1 /2005 PASSED
IN LAC» I\:.59,/II4*I O~N*~.'I"HE FILE OF THE CIVIL

IJIIDGEISDIII " cI--I"II_<;<'.mI,A PARTLY ALLOWING THE

RE§'EF-SENSE" . » vPE';€?FION FOR ENHANCED

 , 'CORvr§E'«EE{SATIOI§:--~ . IIIII _ _

GR'{)fi's N<:§'a6 SF gem IN MFA 10373 013* '.2006.

  

   E§i§'IV"S,Lf§§ARSHAN ARVIND GHOUGALA

I .. ,ImI::Ij 40 YEARS

 '~sI52I SANTOSHKRJMAR ARVIND CIIQUGALA

 AGED 37 YEARS

  f3. SR1 sAI~I.II\f:<:IIMAR ARVIND CHOUGALA

AGE 35 YEARS



ALL ARE AGRICULTURISTS
R/AT HIREKUDI VILLAGE,
CHIKKODI TALUKA

DIST BELGAUM.  CR0S.S,f':1'BJE§ffO}§'g K  _

(By Sri.: S N HATTI & K T ;«:1wA3) 
AND '

1. KARNATAKA NEERAVARI ?£IG.AM L':'D  %
REP BY ITS MANA(3ING,.i'Ji}? E.'f3?P()R L
NO. 1, COFFEE BQ2_'£RD*'B£§1i{,D--I_i'J.G3_
4TH FLOOR,   
DR B R AMBEDKA3§1VEE'D}§i '   "
BANGALQEE.'--_     

2. TH;$"SPE:;LAL:i;AN:3%ACQUISITIQN C)P'FI<j)ER
H1'£V)AKA{;D;'1M"~ _    %
'rAwK..Hu.;:KE<RI' K  
D:sT'B4E1.GAI_;M, J   RESPONDENTS

(By sfig; sR1KANf:*i-i.J.1}3HA’?; v.Y.KUMA12 FOR R1)

” «(By ‘-Sfi.:,_A'{1.S.APATEL;”‘GOVT. ADVOCATE FOR R2)

INMFA NO.10373/O6 FILES U/0.41

RULE 22. CFC AGAENST ‘i’}~IE JUDGMENT 82, AWARD

L DATE13 “1?”/11/£2005 PASSES IN LAC No.59/04 ms: THE
~~ .fj -~._ ‘FiLE i’)f«_’3~ THE CIVIL JU{)GE(SD) cnfistom, PAR’§’LY
;ALL<}w1NG THE REFERENCE PETITION mm ENHANCED
'c:oMPENsAT;0z~z & sgzmstlzxxe FURTHER ENHANCEMENT

9;? COMPENSATION.

This Appeal and cross objections coxning on for

A §’hear:::.g this day, SREEDHAR mo, J., deiivered the

follawingz –

JUD GflN’I’

i.A.No.2 is allowed. Delayef 3.498 _

appeal condoned.

Sri V.Y.K:1mar take§§._V:”:1Qtice”‘ fox”

Niravari Nigam Ltd arm Srri for the
Government. A
The Reegnzjiadentg (¢§ej3iaii:s)V iazefii acquired for the

purpose of “C:i§1Vs§t1*:§ie{;i£i;:.__ _{;{ The LAO awarded

c0mpem*ee£i()f1- atV’::5i1″1e”rate ef”‘RVs;’25,O00/~ per acre. The

3Refe2*ei§ee” the lands as having NA

petential g1″a;1:e£ii–._e0:;{1pensati0n at the rate of $33.11/«,

‘~ Re’.’f£5;”—:—« per sqft. under three categories. The

Nigam Ltd. (for short, ‘KNNL’§ has fixed

aepeél the compensation ganted as excessive

and 7~c0n’£ez1d that the land has no NA potential. The

‘V ” ” ‘: };1::;jm_ H have flied erossmzbjectiexas seeking

…,j’.A:¢j’_,¢¥ihanc:ement of the cornpensation at the rate of £25.17/–

‘ per sq. ft

5

2. The award of the LAO discloses that the

opinion of the panchas Shaw that the vaiue of’

ranges betweezi Rs.2S,O0{)/~– and Rs.32,00{);{*?””;§*§.§3f’€:

The LAO has relied upon the sa}r:§ s{atis{;ics.::{i’.i6’*¥afids’~

soié in the years 1997 to 199%’ “i*i’;}_i€

notification. The sales staiistizgts disclose 5ia.I1£§isf

are sold at Rs.25,0GQ/~– to 4* Haffire, The
lands are dry laflds. fbf’-ifii:§ireg’stration of the
dry lands of Hiifikfldii’§?i1i£igCV.’iS:;f1§{(;Ci»féitV”RS.33,O0O/~ per

acre f0I74.th$’F61é¢3§Il_’t~~ ‘ ‘

3. C{‘h:.:’; an the other hand, have

, A_ the to Show that the lands bearing RS

r€§3s».393i__/3,:«%§”Sv1_/1, 395/2, 394/23, 213/3, 328/1 and RS

3′.\Fo,«§4€}9V.v g_ village are converted for Non»

‘.V.1’x$’i€’:’11.lf.:;*f::;”za.V}4′ purpose. The said lands adjoin iha iands in

A V~:ifqué$ti0n. The ciainxarits have also produced evidence to

siégow that RS No.388 is converted to N€m~Ag1i€t11tura1

‘4 purpose, house sites are farmed by one Padalale, each site

measuiing 30′ X 40′ is aid far £25.47 £00] -. The sale deed
%[

of piot No.20 dated 17.2.1999 is marked as

preliminaxy notification in respect of the 1a1′:(}{ inesqvuestioni’

is issued in the year 2091. Su:fiiey”i*Io.’§309« Btifieifi. V

village limits of Hirekudi v111a.ge.i
the certified copy of ihe inciiiscioses
that RS mass is sitiioiie ‘.adjoii§iI1§Chikkodi-
Miraj road. The said!’ Chikkocii than
Hirekndi. Tizeiiésofie .c:ii.ee<'_i: RS No.388 is
situate Hirekudi viliage and
road. The lands in question are
situate – Mira; Road to the North-

elaimants have produced records to show

‘i§éf.i’idV.’svi1djoir1i11g the lands in question have been

coniferteo Nor1-Agieultural purpose. The said lauds are

Vi situate to the West of Chikkocii – Miraj Road, quite far

aiifay from West of Chikkocii –» Miraj Roaei, and they are

i almost situate in the middie betwwn Hirekudi viilage and

Chikkodi — Miraj Road. Considering the location of RS

Ck

i ‘ ~ Iniowevergv perusal’ of

No.388 and the lands in q1;eetio:1, we find that RSt3-$0.388

has no comparison to the lands in questieIi.”- -4’cj’:fi’vhe

ciaimente have aieo not produced any
that in the NA converted lands anyddeieteéeave d
and sold. The Reference Court

sale deed Ex.P.29 peItaj11ing mcssvefdctedtegfieéemmedd

{he value. If the saie’ ex-chided”, there is
absolutely no credible mat-ejji-ad1″t:S the market value
ofthelande

-.’E’he1*eff-fie’ .e1fie.eV:’Iz1ezte1’iei either way to Show

Whether the ” lands do really have NA

_ er conversions are manipuiated in

the acquisition. There is absolutely no

eredfile avaiiable on record fer this Court to

‘.Vcietezi1;.ii’ie:_ the just and preper compensation. The
A V~:e1eVii:iants have also not iet in eenvincing evidence to prove
market value. Only one witness is examined and

flgheavy reliance is placed on Ex.P.29, the sale deed of a plot

in RS Ne.388. {1} View of the paucity of evidence, we do

8
net feel that it is just: and preper to specuiate in fixing the

market vaiue of the lands in question in the of

justice and interests of the parties. .

necessary that the order of the Reiefeizee i”:3{“.¥L:1;f’_:i:{i.i’Z%_ Te’ fie eei: i

aside, the matter to be reulandeéaiiei’-tiie Referenceev

for fresh consideration and ‘<i.if.§pesal ace-3rr'i.anee with

law. The parties are pei7.g1i{teei"t0–i{:1€ijtfi'1iCe ffifther evidence

in the matter.

‘time eia;iSecE:’V-e2ifid»”=t?giat. the parties are denied of the

eoH1pensai:ie:1,,V v€e_ édireei; that as am. interim measure,

ivvsfhaii ilidefieeit. cempensatiorz at the rate of

£73e;’1,50.,vA{)£3G«,eA’:per acre inclusive of the award made by the

VAt3e;se. The depesit te be made Within four

‘yveeke… are permitted to withdraw the amount

V’ “Vfiiep;e”eiteei. It is directed that the Reference Ceurt shail

dispose of the ease within three meeting.

It is eiarified that the Reference (301311 need not be

influenced by any of the factuai ebsenzatiens made

regardirig the iocation of the iands

potential}. All the contentions are kept c>pe:’-;… «

It is furtzher clarified that ‘ 6-ajchijv-L:;&s:_.Aéif ”

KNNL has already deposited -:3; _c5f’ Rs;

acre, I10 firmher deposit be Ineitie.’
In appeals am? ‘c1’ E§ss-L)b}:j:rctMit;:t13, ;.*1a1’ties are entitled

to refund of Court fee. ~~ ‘

nvb. V _ _