JUDGMENT
Chidananda Ullal, J.
1. The learned Government Pleader had argued that the Reference Court had added a sum of Rs. 1,000/- for fodder. Since the acquired land is 10 acres, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. 1,000 x 10) has been taken and therefore, it added a sum of Rs. 10,000/- while fixing the market value of the acquired land. Having been aggrieved by the same, the appellant had preferred an appeal before the First Appeal Court and the First Appellant Court did not consider that point and therefore, the instant MSA had been filed.
2. The learned Government Pleader, Sri M. Narayanappa, had produced before me a Division Bench ruling of this Court in MFA No. 881 to 884/1976 (DD 21-11-1977). The Division Bench while disposing off the common appeals had observed as hereunder:
“………….. the addition of Rs. 100/- per acre under the head ‘fodder’ or hay, in our opinion, is not justified. In computing the net income of agricultural lands, hay is not taken in account. 50% of the gross yield of the grain alone is taken as the net income for purposes of basing the valuation. The average rate of paddy per bag in the year 1972 as estimated by the Land Acquisition Officer himself was Rs. 80/- per bag. That is the rate adopted by the learned Civil Judge. We disallow the addition of Rs. 100/- made on account of hay…………”
From the above ruling of the Division Bench, it is clear that in the matter of computing the market value of the land, the value of hay or fodder should not be taken into account. The said decision is binding on me. Therefore, I accept the argument of the learned Government Pleader. The argument of the learned Government Pleader is supported the decision of the Division Bench. The learned Government Pleader has also filed a calculation, wherein he had shown the deduction of Rs. 10,000/- out of the compensation amount awarded and in the calculation he had shown the compensation of Rs. 30,200/- Since the respondent had remained absent before Court, I accept the argument of the learned Government Pleader. In following the said decision, I hold that the Reference Court was in error in adding a sum of Rs. 10,000/- while computing the award. Therefore, it is just and necessary for me to correct the judgment passed by the First Appellate Court in the instant appeal.
In view of the above conclusion I have reached, the instant appeal is allowed by revising the market value from Rs. 40,200/- to Rs. 30,200/-
The Registry may draw an award in the above terms.