Next > IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B V NAGARATHNA AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR M.F.A.NO.6101 OF 2017 (LAC) BETWEEN:
1. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE MEMBER, THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR, RASTROTHANA PARISHATH BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
THE PRESENT ADDRESS IS AS FOLLOWS: 5TH FLOOR, NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, NO.14/3, 2ND FLOOR, RASTROTHANA PARISHATH BUILDING, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
THE PRESENT ADDRESS IS AS FOLLOWS: 5TH FLOOR, NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, (INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT), THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 5TH FLOOR, CHANDRAKIRAN BUILDING, KASTURBA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
NOTE: THE CORRECT DESIGNATION AND PRESENT ADDRESS IS AS FOLLOWS:
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-2, THE KARNATAKA INDUSTRIAL AREAS DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 5TH FLOOR, NO.49, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI CHANDRA SHEKAR P V, ADVOCATE) AND:
SRI VENKATESHAIAH, S/O MODALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, RESIDING AT BHUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK – 577 234. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE) **** THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.08.2015 PASSED IN LAC NO.162/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND JMFC, DEVANAHALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Though the appeal is listed to consider IA 1/2017 seeking condonation of delay of 620 days in filing the appeal, having condoned the same, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard finally.
2. The appellants are Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB for short) which has preferred this appeal assailing the judgment and award dated 21.08.2015 passed in LAC No.162/2006 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Devanahalli (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Reference Court’). By the said judgment and award, the Reference Court has allowed the application filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (herein after referred to as ‘the Act’ for the sake of brevity) and has awarded market value at Rs.8,96,000/- per acre in respect of said lands and other statutory benefits. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, KIADB has preferred this appeal.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent -claimants and perused the material on record.
4. Appellants’ counsel drew our attention to the impugned judgment to contend that the impugned judgment and award is virtually an ex-parte one. That there was no contest by the appellants Board, no oral or documentary evidence was let in and the same is on account of the fact that the advocate who had been engaged by the Special Land Acquisition Officer did not take steps to contest the matter. He submitted that on account of there being no contest in the matter, there was no contra material available to the Reference Court to consider against evidence let in by the respondent claimant. In the circumstances, the Reference Court answered issue No.1 partly in the affirmative and fixed the market value at Rs.8,96,000/- per acre with other statutory benefits which is exorbitant. The appellant Board is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award not only because it is an uncontested judgment and award, but also the fact that on merits an exorbitant market value has been awarded/fixed to the respondent claimants. He further sought to contend that the Reference Court has referred to an earlier judgment and award passed by it and relied upon the same, which judgment and award has been set aside by this Court and therefore, if an opportunity is given to the appellants herein, the same could be demonstrated before the Reference Court. Hence, the judgment and award of the Reference Court may be set aside and the matter may be remanded so as to give an opportunity to the appellants herein to let in its evidence and the Reference Court could consider the same in accordance with law and pass a fresh judgment and award.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent claimant supported the impugned judgment and award and contended that the appellants are only interested in procrastinating the matter and in order to deprive the claimant of his just compensation which has been awarded by the Reference Court. He contended that if the appellant has failed to let in evidence the respondent claimant cannot be put to a disadvantage or a prejudice on that account. He submitted that the appellant has to blame itself for not letting in evidence when an opportunity was given to the appellant to do so and further, when the appellant had engaged the services of a counsel. He submitted that the respondent is a senior citizen and he has been deprived of his just compensation and hence the appeal may be dismissed as there is no merit in the same. He also brought to our notice the fact that the Reference Court has relied upon several other judgments to award the said compensation and hence there is no merit in this appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, the following points would arise for our consideration:
(1) Whether the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court calls for any interference in this appeal?
(2) What order?
7. The fact that the respondent claimant has filed an application under Section 18(1) of the Act seeking enhancement of compensation is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant herein along with two others were arraigned as respondents in the said case namely, LAC No.162/2006; a vakalathnama had been filed on behalf of the Special Land Acquisition Officer. But the fact also remains that despite engaging the services of a counsel, no oral or documentary evidence was let in by the appellant herein so as to contest the claim made by the respondent claimant who was seeking enhancement of compensation. In the absence of there being any contra evidence on record, the Reference Court has considered the evidence on record let in by the respondent claimant and placing reliance on certain other judgments and awards passed by it earlier, has determined market value of Rs.8,96,000/- per acre along with other statutory benefits.
8. The question herein is not whether the said award is justified or not. The point to be considered is, whether, if the appellant herein had let in oral and documentary evidence, the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court would have been the same. The appellant is seeking an opportunity to let in oral and documentary evidence since according to the appellant the Reference Court has determined an exorbitant market value of Rs.8,96,000/- per acre based on certain earlier judgments and awards passed by the Reference Court, which have been set aside by this Court. In the circumstances, what has been established is the fact that the impugned judgment and award is virtually an ex parte one, in the absence of any evidence being let in by the appellants who were the respondents before the Reference Court, herein despite engaging the services of a counsel.
9. It is no doubt true that the respondent claimant must be entitled to just compensation, but at the same time there cannot be an unjust enrichment by a land loser. In the circumstances, in order to balance the interest of the parties and having regard to the fact that the impugned judgment is virtually an ex parte one, we deem it just and proper to set aside the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court and remand the matter to the said Court for a fresh adjudication after giving an opportunity to the appellants herein to let in evidence in the matter. LAC No.162/2006 is restored on the file of the Reference Court. However, the matter does not end here. The Reference Court has already determined market value of Rs.8,96,000/- per acre along with all statutory benefits and the appellants have already satisfied 50% of the said award by paying the same to the respondent claimant. In the circumstances, in order to bear in mind the interest of the claimant also, who has succeeded before the Reference Court, the appellant is directed to deposit the balance 50% of the compensation amount awarded by the Reference Court along with all statutory benefits and up to date interest before the Reference Court within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
10. Since the parties are represented by the respective counsel, they are directed to appear before the concerned Reference Court on 25.09.2019 without expecting any separate notices from the said Court. By the said date, the appellant to deposit the balance compensation amount as ordered above. On such deposit being made, the Reference Court shall deposit the same in any Fixed Deposit for an initial period of six months.
11. Since the claim petition is of the year 2006, the Reference Court shall dispose of the same within a period of six months from 25.09.2019.
12. It is needless to observe that both parties shall cooperate with the Reference Court for an expeditious disposal of the claim petition.
The appeal is allowed and disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Parties to bear their respective costs.
Next >