IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO.89/2015 BETWEEN:
THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTIONS) SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY #18, MILLERS ROAD, CANTONMENT, BENGALURU – 560 048 ….APPELLANT (BY SRI N.S.SANJAY GOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SRI H.B.DAYANANDA SINCE DEAD BY LRs.
1(a). H.D.VIJAYKUMAR S/O LATE H.B.DAYANANDA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 1(b). H.D.PREETHAM S/O LATE H.B.DAYANANDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT HIREMAGALUR, CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK AND DISTRICT CHIKKAMAGALUR – 577 101 BASAVARAJ SINCE DEAD BY LR’s 2. SMT.UMA W/O MOHAN KUMAR AGED 35 YEARS MAYAGONDANAHALLI HALEBEEDU HOBLI, BELUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201 3. SMT.THILAKAMMA W/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED 40 YEARS MUGULAVALLI, AMBALE HOBLI CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT – 577 101 4. H.B.RAMESH S/O BASAVARAJ AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS HIREMAGALUR, CHIKAMAGALUR TALUK CHIKAMAGALUR – 577 101 5. THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CHIKMAGALUR – 577 101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI A.V.GANGADHARAPPA, ADV., FOR R1(a-b) AND R-2 TO R-4;
R-5 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED:19.07.2013 PASSED IN L.A.C. APPEAL NO.7/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, CHIKMAGALUR, DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.04.2008 PASSED IN LAC NO.1/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SD), CHIKMAGALUR, ALLOWING THE APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 18(3)(a) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T Whether the compensation awarded to the claimants by the trial court in L.A.C.No.01/2006 which is confirmed by the first appellate court in L.A.C.Appeal No.07/2012 is fair and reasonable, is the question involved in this appeal.
2. The subject matter of the case is 6 guntas of land in Sy.No.1002/9 of Hiremagalur village, Chikmagalur Taluk.
3. The appellant herein was respondent No.2, respondent No.5 was respondent No.1 and respondent No.1 H.B.Dayananda was the claimant in L.A.C.No.01/2006. The said claimant died when the matter was pending in L.A.C.Appeal No.07/2012 before the first appellate court. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 are his legal representatives. For the purpose of convenience, parties will be referred to henceforth as per their rankings before the Trial Court.
4. Respondent No.1 acquired the subject matter of this appeal as well as 25 other lands for the purpose of formation of new Broad Gauge of railway lane between Kadur – Chikmagalur. Appellant was the beneficiary of the said project.
5. A preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 24.06.1998. That was followed by final notification under Section 6(1) on 06.01.1999. In respect of all 26 lands, first respondent passed general award dated 06.01.2000 granting compensation at the rate of `1,90,000/- per acre for wet lands and at the rate of `1,00,000/- per acre for dry lands covered under the said award.
6. On the application of the claimant, the matter was referred to the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Chikmagalur and registered in L.A.C.No.01/2006. The reference court consolidated L.A.C.No.01/2006 along with L.A.C.Nos.2, 17, 32 to 35, 40, 41 to 43, 68 to 71, 74, 79 to 82, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91 and 92/2006 and recorded common evidence in all the cases. By the common award dated 16.4.2008 in the said cases, the reference court awarded compensation at the rate of `50/- per sq.ft. for all the lands acquired under the notification referred to above.
7. The beneficiary/respondent No.2 challenged the said award before this Court in M.F.A.No.2711/2009 (LAC). This Court vide order dated 04.03.2010 for want of pecuniary jurisdiction, directed the Registry to return the appeal memo for presentation before the proper court. Thus the appeal memo was presented before the Principal District Judge, Chikmagalur and that was registered in L.A.C.Appeal No.07/2012.
8. The First Appellate Court by the impugned judgment and decree dismissed the appeal upholding the award passed by the reference court. Therefore, beneficiary/respondent No.2 is before this Court challenging the award passed by the reference court and upheld by the first appellate court in L.A.C.No.07/2012.
9. The similar awards passed by the court below and upheld by the first appellate court were challenged before this court on various grounds in M.F.A.No.3023/2009 c/w M.F.A.Nos.3011/2009, 3013/2009, 3021/2009 and 3018/2009 (LAC). The copies of common judgment dated 28.06.2011 passed in M.F.A.No.3023/2009 and connected cases and order of the Supreme Court dated 01.02.2013 in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC 2812-2831/2013 were made available for the perusal of this Court.
10. There is no dispute that the lands involved in this case and covered in M.F.A.No.3023/2009 c/w M.F.A.Nos.3011/2009, 3013/2009, 3021/2009 and 3018/2009 (LAC) were acquired under the common notification. They were similarly situated. The compensation of `50/- awarded by the trial court was upheld by this court in M.F.A.No.3023/2009 c/w M.F.A.Nos.3011/2009, 3013/2009, 3021/2009 and 3018/2009 (LAC).
11. When the judgments in the said appeals were challenged before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC 2812-2831/2013. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed the following order:
“The special leave petitions are dismissed on the ground of unexplained delay of 437, 436 days and also on merits.”
(emphasis supplied) 12. The controversy in this appeal is covered by the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in M.F.A.No.3023/2009 c/w M.F.A.Nos.3011/2009, 3013/2009, 3021/2009 and 3018/2009 (LAC) and judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC 2812- 2831/2013. Therefore, there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned judgment and decree of the courts below.
The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
In view of disposal of the appeal, pending I.As. stood disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE KNM/-