Smt Kallavva vs The Spl Lao Upper Krishna Project on 26 August, 2010

 [Iii-'3y_:.SnTi.. I§}iCgfia..K01ekar, HCGP)

1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010
BEFORE  7
THE I-IOIWBLE MR. JUSTICE A.s. BOPA1f1*3A''- .

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 101172:12oOf7:i,AC1-«NT _ A 

BETWEEN:

Smt. Kallavva, W /0. Tammam'aA.THo1ef  
R/O. Zunjurwad, Tq. Athani ''    CS 

'-   APPELLANT
(By Sri. B. M. Angadi 831'.1Eé11aritesg_i1.;'.S;».1$EOflS~rr;ath, Advs.)

AND:

The Spl. L'.A."O ' A ,_ 

Upper Krishfia F'rOje._c:t7, 

Jamk1;1'amii "  '
  RESPONDENT

FELAED U/S 54(1) OF LA ACT, AGAINST THE

«JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.02.2007, PASSED IN

_LA.C2SNO.’T-83/2004 ON THE FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.),

* ._ ‘ATHANI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION

j ENHANCED COMPENSATION AND SEEKENG
.._”EUTRTHER ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

‘ééw

ix.)

THIS APPEAL COMING ow FOR ADMIS.sS_Iii€i1ii1V§1’~iicI*1j.}i{II’SA

DAY, THE comer DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: r

JUDGMEN1’ . pp

The appellant is rso.evkin,<i§'-.,iiienhanccnienett

compensation as against aivarded din LAC
No.183/2004. The Refe–re}'1cAe'i._Courthas"fixed the market
value at Rs.l,90,0QO/- peracre. is before this

Court seeking ei1ha:i<1ce1'r.1e'ntiof the said aniount.

2. I~Ieai”di:”t;hei:i::3r3’a,rned’- for the parties and
perused th e appe it

3,; The facts which are not in dispute in this appeal are

tihatspthei question situated in Zunjurwad village

for the purpose of Upper Krishna

Project; In’ respect of the said acquisition, the land losers

” i,f”.xzVe’res:A dissatisfied with the market value assessed by the Land

it Officer. Therefore, they had filed application

Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act seeking for

i
is

’43

reference for the purpose of considering the

the market value. The Reference Court after co’n_sidering the__ C

rival contentions has enhancedfiMthe’« m«arket.:_.iva].ue’iV_

Rs.1,90,000/– per acre. The land1_los.ers ar€.lAobeforei*.

Court contending that the said “fiiéation of ._t:h’ea iiinairket value
by the Reference Court is not aip’piroipi’iate._ and the same is to

be enhanced further.

4. At the of.heai’r.i.ng that this Court
While considerinigiithe if .is_::ivtua:§’tion in respect of the
lands situated. being subject matter of the

notificationiofiithe enhanced the market value

to Rs.2,;l8,QOO/i- “pejriacrel. The said enhancement was made

i’i:._rel’y’i.nA§o.n earlier judgment passed by this Court in MFA

connected matters. Therefore, since

there is no__”oLh”iér material to indicate that the lands in the

if case are not similar to the lands therein and more

‘particularly, taking note of the fact that the Reference Court

‘has-‘Come to the conclusion that the lands in question are

2″‘? ,
. ‘I-9;-;«mm\md’M\?’
9

irrigated sugar cane growing iands, the same market value is

to be fixed in the instant case also.

5. Accordingiy, the judgment dated

by the Reference Court stands rn_o.difi_ed h’¢1’di£:g ithaitgtiéeuu

appellants are entitled to the market 1-.

per acre. They are also entitIed_’to.. the Astatut_or”y benefits ar1dV V

the costs incurred in this appea1.,..iii”v.__

In terms of the above, the disposed of.