IN THE HIGH com: 0? KARNATAKA, BANGALORE DATEQ THXS THE 131" HAT OF JUNE, 2008 BEFORE THE H0!\£*$i.E MR. JUSTICE ASHOX 3. !~iIhiCHI(3§¥'%i§f..T' T 'T T BETWEEN T V SHANKRAYYA S/O RACHAYYA AGE 70 YEARS, OCCJ: AGRICULTURE R./G AURAD-S, TQ AND DIST BIDRR .T _ APPELLANT (av SR1 LOVKESH MALA'§'AL:1A,lfAéVQt;$é.TE') AND H THE STATETHROUQ1 5% 'L % T AT SPECIAL LAN3V%,Ac:Quis1'TiIr3;d.. _(}$FIf.Z_ER ~. KARANJA PRGJECT ~ ' smsm V * '. RESPONDENT
K (3? en: ‘?¢l.AAN§:f-ELYANAPPA, AGA)
V.«-“‘~._VTHIfS°«:MFA FILE§…..U;’S 54(1) OF LA ACT AGAINST THE
JU’DGlV§’E.NT”‘AND ‘i’aWr’¢RD DATED 29/8/{)6 PASSED IN LAC NCL43/01 ON
THE’-_VFILE” i3sE¥_DL.CIVIL EUDGE (SRJDN), ESIDAR, PARTLY
ALLQWING ‘ .TH.E” ‘~Rf:~FERENCE PETITION FGR ENHANCED
CUMPENSATEON’ .”.’AND’ SEEKING FURTHER ENHANCEMENT or
v.V_”‘€QMPENSA}”£0N,. ~ ~ T
— THI$”MFAIS’C:.?OMING ON FOR HEARENG THIS DAY, THE COURT
~ }:;g:L_:3:*:3 RED ‘r%:§_ FOLLGWING:
craps like sugarcane, chilly, tear, cotton, etc. are baEn.{;l:”§raw£?lia__jo¢:a._._” .
the lands in question. He submits that>basa:l””aai:’_£ha:: yields’ 2
certificate (Exhibit P8) and the arica;-list:s{§£>{l:.ila:t%fl’Ps};lll.,a_tl2af
compensation of R.s.1.0Q iakh ls recgiairad taha’ a\g\:ar’r;lie?cj.,v:../_VV
4. Sri M. Naraya.:flappa4,…rflae”‘-~..lea.fhaa:..__A Aaflditional
Gavammant Advacate appellant by
submitting that the viafias irrigated nor
any cash crop is
5. the Lawer Court
Regards. Tha.Raaordja5%?g.5’gs.li§§;f’1;he year 1996-9′? and 1997..
98 show that Ur;ad_VDaI;’f{a1:aI; Jowar, Tear Da! and Saavi
alfegb_1elng;»: son in question’ Tharefcara, E cannat
glva__cradanca.A_Atol tllévsubmission of the appellant that cash crops
aware balAri’g.ligr<:vsé%1Lj«ofl:= like lands in question.
ll fllrfifhhvas", the Racczrd of Rights (Exhibit PS) clcas mat
'._'s'hlawLftl§aTt"t.ha lands are indeed isrigatacl. No doubt the appellant
".'j;ga_s':;5ra.;lu§ad the borawall awmarshlp certificate (Exhibt W) but
'V «V.n_ol4"<;l.o.afilmantaryavidancta is praducad to Show that the bare-wall
ilféad indeed became functianal. If a document were to be
I933.
produced to show that electricity cennectien was ta–i-{eh ~
suppiy of water from the bore-weii ta the. iends_–,”i’t’ ygaye: “‘
ciinched the issue.
7′. Further, some of the ci’é;_[5’u5..beihU erowhiiihitiiveiaixde
in questien dc not figure in the yieidAV§:eri=ificate ahcith_e Vpirice-iist.
Thus based on the materialsVdn..V:rece.rd;:.,’§t “possibie to arrive
at the market value» empieyihg tiie-,__ce’§9iti§ii.2etion method.
Hewever, what the lends, which
are the subject__Vrz:ja~tterV the iancis covered by
M.F.A. i\io.1G_97._ ,e’i*e:”‘vs.itL:ated in the same viliage,
acquired for ‘Nanci arise from the same
preiiminazfgh’etificetibn._iVV: in iv§’i.F.:.A. M04097 of 2007 disposed of
or1’~.V4″V”? i.¥3ij;$”rii,_:””.i.’?,Gfii8,._Vthe market vaiue was re–determined at
To maintain Lmifermity in the matter of
V’1;tieterminet~§on..,.t.’cm?’ compensatien payable on account of
i acqtiisition of lands, I dispose of this appeal in terms
3i_LId*gfinent dated 4″‘ April, 200$ passed in M.F.A. No.10???
iéflizfiefifby enhancing the market value cf the lands in question
figit
_ ‘*i:*i’r:_ ” ”
to Rs.5e,000/- per acre. Needless to abserve that
is entitied to the statutory benefits and prcaspnrtio§§.é§: é”cféivst’é’;
8. The Office £3 directed tgc. _drav)”u;§*the m§’2i5fie<§
in terms sf thisjudgment. ' 'V V V. V H V
9. The appeai stalids’idi$;$nst;,d .df;.’L’ ~