Karnataka High Court
The Executive Engineer vs Dr. D.N.Shivappa on 5 February, 2020
Author: B.M.Shyam Prasad
Bench: B.M.Shyam Prasad
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7214 OF 2015 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
UPPER THUNGA PROJECT
HONNALLI, NOW UNDER
DEVANAGERE DISTRICT.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISTION
OFFICER, UPPER THUNGA PROJECT
SHIMOGA DISTRICT.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.K. RAMACHANDRAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DR. D.N. SHIVAPPA
RESIDENT OF NO. 203, PRADHANA APARTMENTS
9TH C MAIN, RPC LAYOUT
VIJAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560 040.
2. SMT. D.N. VIJAYA
WIFE OF D.N. SHIVAPPA
RESIDENT OF NO. 203
PRADHANA APARTMENTS
9TH C MAIN, RPC LAYOUT
VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 040.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJU BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2)
-2-
THIS MISCELLENEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISTION ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.02.2014 PASSED IN LAC
NO.149/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
HARIHAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FOR
ENHANCED COMPENSATION.
THIS MISCELLENEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the respondents in LAC No.149/2011 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Harihar (for short, 'civil Court') calling in question the judgment and award dated 11.02.2014.
2. The undisputed facts are that the respondents were the owners of the land measuring 2 acres 35 guntas in Sy.No.71/3 of Dodderi Village, Honnali Taluk. They purchased this land in the year 2003-04, and started cultivation of this land along with the adjacent lands owned by them. An extent of 20 guntas in this land in Sy.No.71/3 was notified for acquisition for the purposes of Upper Tunga Branch Canal. The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed General Award dated 21.6.2010 determining the -3- value of the land at Rs.33,194/- per acre, and further determined a sum of Rs.69,000/- as the value of 250 areca nut trees in the land. The respondents being aggrieved by this determination filed an application for reference which is registered before the reference Court in LAC No.149/2011.
3. The respondents have examined first of the respondents as PW.1, and he has stated in his evidence that the land measuring 2 acres 35 guntas in Sy.No.71/3 of Dodderi Village, Honnali Taluk was purchased by the respondents in the year 2003-04 and after the purchase, they have planted areca nut trees. He has also stated the different facilities in their lands for cultivation of areca nut, including tube wells. He has further stated that the areca nut trees in the un-acquired land owned by them are about 10 years and they have an annual net income of Rs.3 lakhs per acre from areca nut. The respondents, apart from the oral evidence of PW.1, have also relied upon, amongst -4- others, the decision of this Court in MFA No.1556/2010, wherein this Court has determined the market value for the land in Sy.No.44 of the same village at Rs.10,08,000/- based on the capitalization method relying upon the details of annual yield of areca nut per acre and the price for the same in the year 2000-01.
4. The reference Court has enhanced the market value to Rs.10,80,000/- per acre relying upon the decision in MFA No.1556/2010 opining that the land that is the subject matter of the decision in MFA No.1556/2010 (acquired in the year 2000-01) and the subject lands are similarly situated lands in the same village. There could not have been depreciation in the value of the lands between 2000-01 and 2007.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shaji Kuriakose and Another vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. and -5- Others1 canvasses that it is settled that of all the different methods in law for determination of the market value, the sales statistical method shall be the preferred method for determination of the market value. The reference Court ought to have seen that the Land Acquisition Officer relied upon the sales statistical method for arriving at the market value of the subject land comparing the values of the different sales. Admittedly, the respondents planted the areca nut trees only after the purchase of the lands in the year 2003-04, and therefore the areca nut plants could not have been more than 3 - 4 years as of the date of the notification. As such, the reference Court could not have relied upon the decision in MFA No.1556/2010 wherein the market value is determined by capitalization method for areca nut yielding land. However, the learned counsel fairly submits that the copies of the sale deeds relied upon by the 1 (2001) 7 SCC 650 -6- Special Land Acquisition Officer have not been placed on record by the appellant before the reference Court.
6. The learned counsel for the respondents argued in support of the impugned judgment and award placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in MFA No.1556/2010 asserting that the reference Court is justified in relying upon this decision in the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned counsel emphasized that the decision of this Court in MFA No.1556/2010 is based on the potential of the areca nut growing lands in Sy.No.44 of Dodderi Village, Honnalli Taluk, and such, potential is decided based on the indisputable areca nut yield per acre and the price per quintal even as of the year 2000-01. The respondent's land is also used for cultivation of areca nut. Therefore, the determination of the market value for the land acquired in the year 2007 based on such determination is reasonable. Additionally, the learned counsel relies upon the decision of -7- this Court in MSA No.91/2013 decided on 25.06.2014 wherein the market value of the land in the same village, i.e., Dodderi Village, Honnali Taluk acquired in the year 2004 is determined at Rs.12,00,000/- per acre, and submits that in the light of this decision the determination of the market value at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre for the land acquired in the year 2007 is not unreasonable.
7. The market value of land in Sy. No.44 of Dodderi Village, Honnali Taluk used for areca nut cultivation is determined at Rs.1,08,000/- in MFA No.1556/2010 as of the year 2000-01 based on the capitalization method. The question is, whether the value of the land in same village and used for areca nut cultivation would be lesser than Rs.10,80,000/- per acre in the year 2007.
8. The appellant's grievance is because the reference Court has relied upon market value determined -8- for the land yielding areca nut in MFA No.1556/2010, and according to the learned counsel for the appellant such valuation could not have been adopted for the respondents' land because the respondents' land had only young areca nut plants that could not have been yielding. The respondents, who would have had to wait for another five years to realize any yield, cannot claim parity with the land that are subject matter of the appeal in MFA No.1556/2010. However, it is undisputed that the respondents have areca nut plants in the lands adjacent to the acquired portion and that even the acquired extent had areca nut plants. As such, the potential of the land as areca nut growing is therefore established.
9. The value of the respondents' land acquired in the year 2007 cannot be reasonably marked up below the value as of 2000-01 only because the areca nut trees were yet to yield. Further, unless some material is placed on record it cannot be reasonably inferred that over the seven -9- years from 2000-01, there would have been depreciation in the market value of lands. Furthermore, this Court in MSA No.91/2013 decided on 25.06.2014, as regards the land in Sy.No.44 of Dodderi Village, Hosahalli Taluk acquired for the similar purpose but vide preliminary notification dated 27.7.2004, has determined the market value at Rs.12,00,000/- per acre based on the market value as per the decision in MFA No.1556/2010 at Rs.10,80,000/- with the addition of 5% towards escalation. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the market value at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre for the land acquired in the year 2007 is not unreasonable.
10. It is settled that each case will have to be decided in the peculiar facts and circumstances of that case, and in the factual matrix of this case, the reference Court's decision based on the earlier decision of this Court in MFA No.1556/2010 would be proper. It is also undisputed that the appellants have already deposited the
- 10 -
amount as per the reference Court's decision and the same is withdrawn by the respondents.
For the foregoing reasons, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no reason for interference with the reference Court's judgment. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
SD/-
JUDGE SA Ct:sr