@
I
IN THE HIGH COURT 0}?' KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT' BENCH EXT DHARWAE)
DATED mzs THE} 5% DAY OF' FEBRUARY 20A_*1*'1;;
MFA no. ;__g195l2o%6é.. -s
mm raos.12196i2oe5 1219712066. 1219_9I2(30&=,
1220612006. 122o1;1_goG+5u1;122o2%g%mg;9*ow§,;;g_m";,,,_g:3.~g:";=s"
Nos.70'?'l2009. ?os12oo9., *;o9/2oa9,»71e{2.eo9,
7:1/2009, 71212009 as 713/2909 f:
in MFA No. 1219512006 '%
BETw&jE:'2\é":T' 'C1'.
The Spééiai LaV11d"Q§E{:e:r,
Upper Pr<3j<::iT.,' ,\ '
Jama};ha:3di;«.§xtha;1§., ~~ ..APPELLANT
- {E331 1:1; §4.1;uu¢a'im:,...u«::GP. 3
1} Nemagoufi
2. Sétjgffipgaé bhaxmanna Nemagoud
AA ;7{:'$0_th R10 Zunjurwad,
V "T'a_1?i11E'Lj;A:s:T: "
(832 Sn' D.N.Kulkarn.i, HCGP.)
AND:
Siddappa Bhimajppa Sankonatti,' 1 " .
R/0 Zunjuxwad,
Taiuk: Athani, . ' ' _' V " "
District: Belgaum. _ ; _.'.'RE8PONDENT
In MFA;$£o.i2i9T5?:g2(ié5 _
BE'I'WEEf<r:_ * ' a T' V?
The Smcia} Aefiguiéétibii Officer,
4__. .. Upper.?-'Krishna '
'Jamé1khaitIdi;'A*.n?sAthani. """ " "APPELLANT
"=,;_:33; T§§;';~¢.,.:§<%'i1£<;ai:fni, I-ICGP.)
V . AND?"
V. fifinlzangbfida Amlagolzda Patti},
"Rig. Zunjunvad, Taluk: Athazli,
_ ~__Ii)'i;s1:i'iCi:: Be-Igaum, "RESPQNQENT
'T : ' * gay? Sn: Ami Kale, Adv.)
£11 MFA No. 1219912006
BETWEEN:
The Specia}. Laad Acquisition Offiiliil',
Upper Krishna Projcci,
Jamakhandi, Athani. ..AP9Ei,LAf§«f%j"' -- ~
(By Sri D.N.K11§ka1'13.i, HCGP.)
AND:
1.
Mahabeobi,
W] 0 Shikandar,
Major.
2. Bismilla, W/0 Appalai, ~. V Major. . 3. shabana,«fi%%
w/ c;;_Ra3’a1.«.=; @ v§%aigz3pn5i3§ai*—-G:1nabi,
Majeii. .
(All are I7?g’~V0 ‘Zt13;j1§umfaVd;”bLV
D’1’§3t1:j:E..c;¥:.: ..Be}gaum.–}~ ” ..RESPC)NIf}ENTS
(B§;»{‘ S33′ Adv.)
In P9I–FA.§x£0.-3220012006
_ ” The Land Acquisition Qfiiccr,
” _ Upper Krishxla Project,
…_Jama.1{handi, Amani, ..APPEL{,AN'”£’
V’ (By Sri Ij).N.K1.2lk:aJ:ni, HCGP.)
AND:
Jzhagaud Baht: Yandolli,
R] 0 Zunjuxwad,
Taiuk: Athafii,
District: Belgaum. ..RES}13N’!jE?§T T’ J
(By Sri Anil Kale, Adv.)
In MFA N9. IQEGII 2006
BET”? EEN:
The Special Land Acqmsiiién ”
Upper Kriahna Project, __ — .
Jamakhandi, Athani. ‘ &’:.£x§’}3ELLAN’I’
(83: Sri 9.N.Ku:_kéif§:fi,’_V!a§.5;p:; ‘V
AND:
I}hanva11i}1..f5arag 0u€i’1a..VB¢I5éiT;iLV
R/oZunju:w’ac1,’v V –
Taiuk: ‘i’-yfiglani, ‘-
. &_vDisf;*i€;s1t: _____ ” » ..RESP()N§E}N’I”
(3531:; A};;fl¥fiéiié’,..Adv.)
In mfg 1330; 12226212005
– ~ _ ‘;3E’1*xvE7E,:§z”:
V’ Lané Acquisiiicn Officer,
‘ — . V_ __ Upper’ Krishna Pmject,
VA Jazzzaichandi, Athani. ..API3’ELLAN’i”‘
(By Sri I}.i*Z.KuIkaz’3:1i, }iCGP.}
AND;
Jinnappa Rayappa Haiingali,
R] 0 Zunjuxwad,
Taluk; Athani,
Distxict: Belgaum. V
(By Sri Anjl Kale, Adv.)
In MFA.CRC}B No,7{)'}'l2$09
BETW BEN:
1. Rayappa, S10 .
2. Satyappa, S (D. "
Both are V
R/0 Eufljatwad, ‘i”?q’:– Aihfani, ‘V
Dist’: Be1_ga1:irx1; ..{ZiROSS-GB.§ECTQRS
(By Sri §:1ii1V_§{a1e,’;’£_d:§v£.}\\’
AND: »
~ .fi”}:1c Lémd Acéfiiéifion Officer,
[}ppc.1j ‘Project,
Jaugakilandi; !3;fI1.’ani. ,.RESP(}I’5}3E§P~¥T
(83; weep.)
“in. MFA’.a:;§:%0B N0.7’O8i 2009
_ Sisiidappa S} (3. Bhimappa Samkonatti,
“Age; 68 years, Occ:Agricuitu1′:3.s.t,
R] 0 Z’£1I1jE1.I’W8.d,
Talukz Athani,
Qistxict; Bezlgaum. ..CR€3SS~GBJE{3′-“I’GR
(33: Sui Am’: Kale, Adv.)
AND:
The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
Upper Krishna Project,
Jamakhandi, Athani. 1. H A
{E37 S13′. 13.N.Ku1kami, HCGP.)
In MFACROB Ne-.’}’09/2009
BETWEEN:
Venkanagouda Azxnagotiéia Patfl, _ V –.
Age: Major, Occ: Agflculfufi?3t,’~ }
R/o:Zu;nju1:Wad,Tq: Atha13i’,’ _ ‘ __
Dist: Belgaum. I ,:’_(3ROSS-OBJECTOR
(By 593% Aaii__K:$3¢. 1; ‘
AEQD:
The bflicer,
Upper KI’.iS1i.’I.1&3.VPIV'<)",i"¢f3§§f.T’aé%3.73.0/2009
B§:rwE__m;¥%A AT
‘ ” — V’ L T Sfiétsfiiahahmbi WI 0 Shikandar;
K ” ,2; . Bismflla W] 0 Appaialg
Smt.Sha¥:>ana W/0 Rajale Gunaki;
A11 are Major, Occ: figficuiiulifitfi,
R/0: Zunjarwaé, Tq: Athani,
Distfielgaum. .”CROSS~C}’B}EC’1’GRS
{By Sr; A311 Kaie, Adm)
AND:
The Special Land Acquisitien Oficer,
Upper Krishna Pro}ec1′:,
Jamakhandi, Atharzi. _. ~ u
(By Sri D.N.Ku1ka;1:ni, Heep.)
Ia MFA..C:R(‘.}B No.’711];2{}Q9
BETW§3Ei\E:
Jinagoud S/0 Babu _'
Age: Major, Occ: Agflcultizsist, iv
R/<3: Zunjaxwad, Tq: Athani; _ '
Dist 3618311111' {;'*§:.iv7i'B.;E<::'I'c;R
{By Sr; Anil . V.
AND:
The Sgéracial Gfficsr,
Upper '
Jamakhagndi, .Athani; _ ‘ mgsmmmgm’
(gy§:~i m,N.14iu1i;_a?n:ii, :%3§P.}
fgg §;§F.’AE§?§R;GB._No.7 ii”? 2039
, _
Qi1:~:._i1avaa.'<a:'c:j'§.) Paragouda B ?afi1,
Agez" !\»'Ea??j;;r,' Qcc: Agiculturist,
R§a.Zu:)__.§anva<§, Tq: Athani,
V, Belgamzn. . «C"RQSS-QBJECITQR
$11 Ami} Kala, Adm}
'"}~\N{}:
Thé Specia} Land acqzxisifion Oficsz;
Upper Kxishfia Project?
Jamakhandi, Athaml. ..RESPQE’iDE:”‘é'”§’
(By Sri D.N.K111karni, §iC2GP.)
In M13-‘A.CR{3B No.7 13/12899
BETW BEN ;
JiI:na§pa Si 0 Rayaypa Halingah,
Age; Major, Occ: Agziculturist, * ‘
R/ezzunjazwaci, “}’q:At}:1a1:1i,
Dist: Belgaum. ..C§2*.C=SS~«OB;;3E(.’3TOR
{By Ssri Anal Kale, Adv.) A X Z
The Special =
Upper Kxishxgta’ V
Jamakhanc1i,’_§t1:g:;;i. ‘– » «_ ‘ ..§€ESPONDEN’I’
(By Sri E}.N.§<:§]1§érp.;, :'E<{Cii§{i3:}…. _ —
'I'heSi:__ i$?iiVsC£}33;fi;.=, G?1:_$i '~;'r"?§1":s"% Appcais and Cmoss Objections
are filed againsiv. t11€._j1L{ig:;;.?3nt and award datezi 21.04.2606
pa1sseۤ'i31LLAC %'%c$s;351; 369, 364, 359, $368, 36? 8:. 366 csf
v. 4;-in file of "£}1§__ C_'§i¢.?i]i Judge: (Sr.i)z1.), Athani.
' .Ti1e_3eVfi.}%§f2&a}s and Cross Objections coming an far fistiai
'V'I3.€éIf;Ilg;, ':§a3{£Im Qourt cielivared the f0§l0Wing:~
JU£}GMEHT
Thtfi sewn appeals are flied by {fie Spatial Lanai
xi#%§Yx€_§'§}.:Zi§§'.f3;{3f1 Gfiicer, ifppfir Krishna Project, Jamkhatldi, Athani,
V. —-.' 'ché,%.1i€x1giflg the comma}: judgmant pas:-sezé By the Reibmnca
, awartiirag compensaiiozz unifcrrzaly at ihfi rats of
Rs.1,9{},QG{}/– per acrm treating these lanés as sugarcane
gmwmg lands. Thfi claimants have ffifiid Cross Qbjections fir;
10
03. A11 these lands are situated in Zunjmwad village of
Athanj Taluk, Belgamn District. The lands W€:{‘€ acquired by a
Preliminary Notification issued under Section 4(1) of t7$i€.»Land
Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’) an 15.0(:’s.’2GO3_.a$”
submergad in the backwamr of Upper
Almaiiti. The Special Land Acquis\it{é:1″f}_fij§;:er«1§a§s__§as9se$”;a b
common award in respect cf sev c:1_fa1-_iands _-viI};C1i1d’i1f;’.g’*–. ‘tl1€V
acquired lands awarding Cofifipensaifisn o f
R:-s.1,23,959/« per acrev fog i112’gzattec.!§VL_:iaf1’tis axlii Rs.4~2:,45 1/ ~ per
acme for dry lands.
O4. ‘i’1 1’euciaimafit$:_LjVfiiéé._fipfjiications under Section 18(1) of
the Pgrrig seelifiagv ref£tmA:dcé«”‘é§f their disputes for adjudication of
°–.fi1€ :–{£E)I’§é_’€Cf'”!§}aI’1{€:{VV*é?LEi1i1E payabic. On refemnca, the paxfies
fiviéiegncgi. The Reference Court has detemiined {ha
cb1ni5en$afi{§§_:én resysct af lands involved in all these appeals
._at Rs.’~i_,”€}(I},€)0G/– per acm mcmfling 3 finding that ail these
“« ‘ia1gz€i $s_. were irrigated lands where sugarcane CI’0};) was grown.
‘ E; garagaph 13 of that jutigmant, the R€fer6:11<:e Court has
referred to the evidencir sf B.W.1 -~ the Special Land
Acquisitign Qfficcr whc: has stated in his cmsswexamination
'that: the acquirfid lands were situated on the bank cf Krishna
1}
River. Ha has further stated. that the land owzmrs sf 'Savadi,
Zulijmwad, Slzirahatti viilage used ta grow sugaR::an.}é'<«..¢rQps
with the help of Krishna River water. The Refcmxiégé
further taken Calf: '£0 rafer to the er1t_r.i{:fs_ in ':fig3':2..Vts§" .
_pe:rf..a.i:t1iz1g to these fiends which wt-im
wherein the crop gmwn was n::€:n-tioned'-as' V1113 such. V '
circumstances, the Reference héId«. {fie amount
awarded by the .La;1<i in a sum of
Rs.42,4S1/ — was 1:90 nieagreihand could not have
bfifilll V3311'-'id b;Y. treating them as
88. Thfi i’1a'{zé preduced the yielé Notification
V’ tuVvV.s;uga£<faI1i:'5crop far the years 19§38–99 till 2604-05
have 3130 pmduced {ha price list of the
. 'ifééslicd by Nandi C0~operativc Sugar Facriory,
$;ijap1:z:=. fiigetfiat, as per Ex.Pf.2s1'i~-A. 'F1113 §I'iC'f: list pertaixls it}
1992-93 ti}! 2{}O4-05, The R€f€1°'£'I1C€ Ceurt has
" 'di$;:u$sed the Yield §'~f0'£:€fi<:a't:im;1 anfi file pziee 2&3: at paragraph»
a 9f the juégmem and has came to ma concinsiwn that as pa'
the yieicia statistic ftlniishezi, {ha fazmers cf Athaui useé {G
grew sugarcane in flilfi razzga sf 5%.} to 52 tannes d"LEI'?i}3.g 199%
12
2000 1333 2003-04. it has also pointed out that as p;;%é§1e§ ;’p.£§ce
list, the price of sugarcaizc was at the rate
:2o00–0 1, RS868/– fcsr 2001-92 and”R”S.’9S’?_/”.; fgfgéa-é}d:sV. :1 V’
has themfera observed that the averétge:*p£ice <jf.,V$ugaI¥:"a;iie naa
on the date of tha Notification oéinc if Biif' V
While calculating the v::s.gr1{c:f£.V"'iza:=..§'Lj:ti€:',' 1;}:1e Rfiffireaice Cowrt
perszladed itseif to take: Vgézs' v'At1«'f§:t1*:;x,r.=:s per acre and
muifipiies it by $9.92; 1 at Rs.i"3'7',884/ –
PET 3939 35" 'V the cost 0:?
c111tivatic»*n;v 18,9421». Appiying the
mulfipiier «sf ‘~V§:lfi€ is arrived at Rs.1,89,42{3}~
rounded off .:«:.:¥ R;s. ;{ -é.
. R$ferei&:7é””C£)nrt has further helé mat in sun’ iiar
,C;éas_&:iS ” Court had (:o11fin;t1e-:1 the award of
Rs..:g;9e,eQ{;;__§;;;er am in M.F.A.No.27?3/2005 disposed 9:? on
%’…2:.06;~2%a§::5 arising Gut of LAC’; NQQG4/2003. Apart frem
{Em stammry sums paya¥t}i::=:, namaiy 38% solatium an
{as enhanced market V3136 and 12°23 aédifianal market vahze
from {km data af 4(1) Natificatiozx :0 33% date of awzaré, iniarmt
as pmzrided unéer the p}:'<;)ViSiQflS 0f the Land Aequisifion fiat at
the ram of 90%; ané 15% is awaxficzds
13
$7. In the operative portion Qf tbs judgment at pagagfiiph-4,
the Reference Ceurt has held that apart fI'{)II1:””i’;’i”l.(?,’Vv’.%_§Z§_:_ZiC:%CV9:<2'§.':1vi.i1"t
awaltied tewaxfls statutory sums the c1a1.:'.m,:;zT~'}:1.tsV ifarg
entitleé far interest at the rate 0f:.'9°2'E)mp.é3..""§)Ii"tfiilé'Eflfiiéijlfiéd
market value: fzrom the date of (3 isposésfisgsion
the first ytzar and 15% pa. f:gfusubSéi;:§éi;fi .= till its;
3
realisation .
88. Learned GaVernm.a§$;1§:v’T’P1§:aifj1VE:1}»a;3p§<ai5%i;f1g'for the appellant
contends t}1at. ' R(2ff:i'–I'fiI?iC'C : (io1:ir£':.°haaf« erred ix} fixing the
mark€'iL va11:e:;'—- .}~3c1"' acre and also in awarding
interest _fi;<;–. case may ha with efiect from the
date'; cf _.aisjm–ss_'essio:§' gassing sight of the fact that: the
were inifi,-ated 0:13}: on 1i":'$.€}3.2303 'fly
' lfifiifificafian. He ylaces reiiancé on the juezigmerzt <31'
thé'-~fi;pe§:* 399:9: in the caafi sf Land Acquisition camcer and
Commissioner & Another Vs. Kemangcmdct 8;
V' rsporied in (2085) 12 SCC 44-3 is cantend that
_»Vi;§,terest far pre Section %{ 1} Notificatian period couid 119%: have
baa}; aWa.i'd€C1.
Q
14
09. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants who has
fiiefi the emss objections in all these cases places reiin’12ee._011
the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of
M.F.A..No.5262l2OG5 connected iwiih > ‘obj’cc:ioin;
418/200? ciisposed of an 28.01.2698 ::’a;3.éi
zespect of the lands situate€i*in«–..};he émie VZ”2;:;tijiiii”v3:5iI’d. The paints
that arise fer eensideratien are:
15
“{2}? Whether the market value fixed by the
Reference Court at Rs.1A,90,U00/- is just and
reasonabfe in the facts and circumstances of ‘
case?
(ii) Whether the Reference ‘
justified in awarding interestoozyith é]fj?¢o£_fro:n.v£§’r1e 2
date of dizspossession whioh’v.._;§V–oanteoriorVioo:’ihé’> ‘
date of Prefiminary 1Vo§:_’ficnt1’o;1??”:’ ‘
1 1. As regards the f1I’ST. ‘”:m1r;’¢2._V1i§wk:;1Vej;te.’I:;iz§;”I_s.V:t>12.Vnecord in ihe
form of oral and d0(;}i3;ent;1ijz”V’e’x’?§dc::1o§:-axiii found by the
R€ft3I”€:3f],C€: of sugarcane per
acre duzitlg the to 2003-04 ranged
from .30 to 53 to:v11ié:s_;.aa itievant year of Pmiiminazy
§’§oti;fica.i;i.o;o 33.3. 2002.363. T116 Reference Court ought to have
basis for determining the markot value.
“42 tonnes as the yield of tho sugamane
‘eke hich has 1:1o¥:>a”2s;s’§iss.
” ..CouI:S{:i agirpearing for tho claimants’ is night and justified
§4ji.ooo3t:::.1t«1i:1g that the Reference Court has not acteé on any
this regard. Moreover, the Yielti Notification proéucod
S1I.§p0I’1;S this position. In addifion, if the price: of
V. the sugarcane per tonne during {E1186 years from 203001 to
16
20102»-O3 at the rate of R3905] –, Rs.905]– and Rs.810.j”‘~—- as is
clear fmm coiumn no.6 of Ex.P24A is considered,_M§i§§fié a¥§£;1;éig§:
price will come to Rs.873.33. The Reference
“taken the prevailing price $31′ the yej:z:’i~”;’ :l.2’00&}fi G2_: gas b
mentioned in column, 110. 1 1 of
SM? rate per metric tonne, W}3aféa,s co.Ium__ 11′ the”
cane price per meme Jtgnnne. f}1é[‘Can5§ price as
mentioned in column 210.6 t}.§{ia ft$z:{é::age of thme years
Wcmid come to R?s’;8__’73.3’3′ to above which
according juéfi’-ai2£1’a§:p1′{)pfiate Way of finding out
the c(3I’m7=;:t valufi 9ff:t’.}._1L{V:§ grown in the land’
13. Ii'<:a«1c';if.:«,1ti<:nV§;;s. madafon this basis for 50 tonnes at {ha
,_I'3'{i€'3 R;$A.:8":'.'_3.33;,V"VI1h'3«—-£1;[I1Ounf wifl Wcrrk out {£1} Rs-..43,666.5{3.
towards the cost of cultivatian, the amount
wfil661336vt0'.V–R$;:2'i,833.25. Applying the multiplier (Bf 3.0, if the
'get i:icQ§fi :i.S'«::a1en1aie:d, '€113 amount comes its Rs.2,18,332.5G
mfifidggi 53:9 Rs.2,18,Q€}()/-
Pas regazds ‘U35: interest awaxded fmm the daie 0f
éispo$se$sion which 19 prior to the date of M1) fiotification, in
View of the juégmsni; relieci upmz ‘E33; tbs ieazneé Gsvemment
Plsader it: the ease Gf ,R..I.«.JAD\T (B) BY L..Rs. Vs. 3333 &
18
the eiaimants were gmwing sugarcane in the iaué, the
Reference Court was righfi and justified in taking the
sugarcane crap as basis for arriving at the market value by
applying the eapitalizatian method.
16. It is Well estabiished that the value of the
assessed by taking into account the E-631 use ‘to -1:>.:I1€:i–.&
can be put :0. If the land in ques§fien;1’.A_A§v”ais -ire
growing sugaxeane at the releva:zt_v”iime a15i£i.__if’4:}g1erc dither ”
evidence to the eontraxy, fit cannet Said theit~theVA.¥2eference
Ceur: c0::inz3aii:teeif’V_.a1;;:nefro1f ife assessing the market vaiue on
that basis} u ‘?herefefe;’ afhe i’:efitenti0fi urged by the learned
Government I3}’eaeier.fa}§ingV«’e1:pper*: from the deeisirm referred;
aiiztgve be accepted in the fads and
€;37_r(i’x11:i$?:3:1:1;ee”:j;be present case, pariieuiarly becauee the
Divisigfiil 5):’ this Court in the ease xeferred and reiiefi
. , L*pon $3.5″ ieameci eounsei for the cla.i13::antsfemes~objecters
i§:$2f,e.i2:§ij§s1ied the same methed as is apgslied by the Reference
in this eaee and has awarded cesmpensafion ii: a sum of
‘4″‘.:§€s.2,38,GO0/« far the iands eituateci in the same village, but
acquired by way {if Netification daied 18.11.2998.
If the said judgment is taken as a basis, as is asserted fig: the
%.
19
Ieasnsd counsel far ‘(ht claimants, and provisien fer géqiiafion
is mads, tbs amount per acre will be in
Rs.3,£){),C2GO/–. The said judgment is not ta.1;s:}
this case: as there is no material prigdugrzfii to
$h{)W that the lancis i11volved ;i11’_
ianés involved in the present ca’i§cV¢.§§12-:_cofii}3af;§3;bvi€ their soil,
texture, facilities and If$ A§’£1V(A;vt, no such
evidence i$ Red before thcé this connectian.
I13. addition, a\zr;I’fi_;%,g3fVZ’ pfiéc Vper tonne only for
the ‘hf; taking ‘(ha yield at 50
tonnes},
1?. In Gi%?C}fiILSfaflC€S of ibis case and in the
absgxzfcé of clear-. that flue acguired Eaxzds enjoyed the
§.:e£§:§f;£%:agthe lands mvema ii; MFA E05252/2005, this
{Z’Q”z;L¥ifi: giiideé by thz: svidence on record “:0 axztive at a
V V’ _ ji1sf”a:1d ,._rea${3nab1e compensation. Therefore, the ccmtentritms
L&fg§%d §y’v—-‘{}1e learned Gmzemment Pleadfiz’ and the conteniians
T:AurVge:§…«5b3? the Cress Ob_§ect<:::*s Head to be fl{}ti(:fid oniy fear being
V .. ztjécied.
18. In {$16 msuifi and for firm forfigomg, 3}} the appeals filed
by the Spsciai Land Acquisificn Qifimr are fiarty ailaweé, The
1%