Bangalore District Court
) Muddaiah & Others vs ) The Commissioner on 27 September, 2022
1
L.A.C. No. 27/1996
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (C.C.H. No.17)
Dated this the 27 th day of September, 2022.
PRESENT:
Smt. Sheila B.M, M.Com.,LLM.
II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.
: LAND ACQUISITION CASE NO.27/1996:
CLAIMANTS:
1) Muddaiah & others
Since dead by LRs
1(a) Eramma
W/o late. Muddaiah
Aged about 88 years
1(b) Smt. Kariyamma
W/o late. Thimmaiah
Aged about 48 years
1(c) Smt. Shanthamma
W/o late. Thimmaiah
Aged about 38 years
1(d) Smt. Nirmala
D/o late. Thimmaiah
Aged about 23 years
1(e) Smt. Vedavathi
D/o late. Thimmaiah
Aged about 28 years
1(f) Smt. Nagarathna
D/o late. Thimmaiah
2
L.A.C. No. 27/1996
Aged about 26 years
All are residing at
Chikkagolarahalli village
Viswaneedam post
Magadi road, Yeshwanthpura Hobli
Bengaluru North Taluka
Bengaluru.
2) Shankarachary
Since dead by LRs
2(a) S. Sridhar
S/o late. Shankarachary
Major
2(b) Smt. Kamalamma
W/o late. Shankarachary
Aged about 60 years
Both are residing at
# 11/6 Datte Bhavani
Pillappa Lane, Nagarathpet cross
Bengaluru.
and also Sreenidhi Jewellary
Avenue Road
Bengaluru -560 002.
3) C. Nagaraj
S/o late. Chikkanna
Aged about 50 years
R/at # 13 'B' Block
Adugodi Quarters
Bengaluru -560 030.
(LRs of C-1 - Sri. TVN, Advocate)
(LR of C-2 - Sri. PRR, Advocate)
(C-2(b) - Sri. GHR, Advocate)
(C-3 Sri. GP, Advocate )
3
L.A.C. No. 27/1996
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENTS:
1) The Commissioner
BDA,
Bengaluru.
2) The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
B.D.A.
Bengaluru.
(By Sri. MG, Advocate)
: JUDGMENT :
The respondent No.2/SLAO, Bangalore Development Authority, Bangalore has sent this composite reference under Sections 18, 30 and 31(2) of L.A. Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as 'L.A. Act' for short).
.2. The brief facts of the case is that the land bearing Sy.No.45/3B measuring 1 acres 24 guntas of Nagadevanahalli village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka was acquired by the B.D.A. for formation of Jnanabharati layout. Preliminary notification was published in the Gazette on 19.01.1989 and final 4 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 notification was published in the Gazette on 03.03.1994. Possession of the land has been taken on 10.07.1994. The L.A.O. has passed the award on 04.07.1994, fixing the compensation at Rs.4,01,695/-. As there was a dispute with regard to title, the L.A.O. has sent the reference to this Court and has deposited a sum of Rs. 4,01,695/-. The said amount has been deposited before this Court. The said amount has been kept in F.D. in the State Bank of India, Cauvery Bhavan Branch, Bengaluru.
.3. The claimants 1(a) to 1(f) have filed claim statement stating that they are the legal heirs of claimant No. 1 Muddaiah. The claimant No. 1(a) is the wife of claimant No. 1 Muddaiah and claimants 1(b) and 1(c) are his daughter-in-laws and wives of his son late. Thimmaiah, who is the only son of late. Muddaiah and Eramma. The claimants 1(d) to 1(f) are the daughters of claimant No. 1(b). It is stated that the property bearing Sy.No. 45/3 measuring 3 acres 6 guntas situated at Nagadevanahalli village originally belonged to one Naga 5 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 S/o Pulithimma and said Naga had two sons namely Siriyappa and Muddaiah and the said property orally partitioned by Siriyappa and Muddaiah by allotting 1 acre 23 guntas each.
.4. It is stated that Siriyappa and his only son Chikkanna have initially mortgaged their share of property in-favour of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna through a registered mortgage deed dated 19.11.1954 bearing registration No. 3999/1954-55 and thereafter they have sold the said property in-favour of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna through a registered sale deed vide Registration No. 2845/1958-59 dated 27.10.1958. Since then Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna was in possession and enjoyment of the said property as an absolute owner he got changed revenue entries in his name and also got entered in record of rights at Sl. No.594.
.5. The share of Siriyappa's younger brother Muddaiah is inherited by his son Thimma @ Thimmaiah as his father Muddaiah predeceased without obtaining 6 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 change of revenue entries in his name. It is stated that during 1987-88 the land bearing Sy.No. 45/3 was phoded as per the ADLR orders passed in ADLRMPR 1328/1987-88, TQMPRBS 13/1987-88. The land allotted to the share of Muddaiah inherited by his son Thimma @ Thimmaiah is renumbered as Sy.No. 45/3A measuring 1 acre 23 guntas and the land purchased by Muddaiah from Siriyappa and his son Chikkanna is renumbered as Sy.No. 45/3B. It is stated that Muddaiah the younger brother of Siriyappa is different from Muddaiah. The share of Muddaiah in Sy.No. 45/3 is inherited by his son Thimma @ Thimmaiah and after phodi renumbered as Sy.No. 45/3A and the share of Siriyappa in Sy.No. 45/3 sold to Muddaiah is renumbered as Sy.No. 45/3B.
.6. It is stated that Muddaiah during his life time challenged the acquisition notification in W.P. No. 44467/1999 in which the interim orders passed by staying final notification on 17.12.1999 and during pendency of the acquisition proceedings he died on 7 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 19.12.1999. Subsequently his only son Thimmaiah was pursuing the affairs of family till his death on 09.09.2011 leaving behind the claimants 1(a) to 1(f).
.7. It is stated that the claimant No. 3 Nagaraja S/o Chikkanna is having no any manner of right, title and interest over the property bearing Sy.No. 45/3B which is the subject matter of the above case as the same was sold by his father and grand father through a registered sale deed in-favour of Muddaiah on 27.10.1958; that the said claimant No. 3 is trying to take advantage of similarity of names of Muddaiah the purchaser of their share of land and Muddaiah, his paternal uncle and thereby trying to mislead this Court so as to knock off the compensation amount. They are the lawful owners of the property bearing Sy.No. 45/3B. Hence, prayed to award compensation amount.
.8. The claimant No. 3 has filed claim statement stating that he is the great grandson of Naga S/o Pulithimma. The said Naga had sons namely Siriyappa and Muddaiah. The said Muddaiah had one son by 8 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 name Thimmaiah. Chikkanna is the only one son of Siriyappa. The claimant No. 3 is the son of Chikkanna.
.9. It is stated that there was oral partition between Siriyappa and Muddaiah prior to 1975 wherein Sy.No. 45/3 measuring 3 acres 8 guntas was divided equally i.e., 1 acre 24 guntas each. It is stated that as per the said panchayath parikath between Siriyappa children and Muddaiah and children dated 26.07.1975 the land bearing Sy.No. 45/3B measuring 1 acre24 guntas was allotted to the share of Siriyappa and sons and the land bearing Sy.No. 45/3A measuring 1 acre 24 guntas was allotted to the share of Muddaiah and sons. It is stated that Siriyappa expired leaving behind his son Chikkanna. The said Chikkanna expired leaving behind the claimant No. 3 herein. Thus the claimant No. 3 is the owner of Sy.No. 45/3B measuring 1 acre 24 guntas of Nagadevanahalli village.
.10. It is stated that even though panchayath partition taken place, the revenue records were standing in the name of Muddaiah only. Taking advantage of the 9 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 same the said Muddaiah and children have illegally executed a General Power of Attorney, agreement of sale and affidavit dated 15.09.1993 in-favour of one Shankarachari (claimant No. 2) in-respect of claimant No. 3 property. It is stated that Muddaiah and sons have no legal right to alienate the claimant No. 3 property to claimant No. 2. The claimant No. 1 legal heirs and claimant No. 2 legal heirs have no right, title and interest over the said land, are claiming false right over the said land. It is stated that the claimant No. 3 being the legal heir of Siriyappa and Chikkanna, is entitled for compensation amount.
.11. In order to prove their case, the claimant No.3 Nagaraj is examined as PW.1. The SPA holder of claimant No. 1(a) to 1(f) is examined as PW.2. Documents got marked at Ex.P.1 to 60.
.12. Heard the arguments.
.13. The following points that would arise for my consideration are:
10
L.A.C. No. 27/1996
1) Which of the claimants are entitled for compensation amount in-respect of acquired property measuring 1 acre 24 guntas in Sy.No.45/3B of Nagadevanahalli village, Kengeri Hobli,, Bengaluru South Taluka ?
2) What order or award?
.14. My findings on the above points are as under:
Point No.1: As per discussion Point No.2:As per final order, for the following:
REASONS .15. Point No.1: It is undisputed fact that Naga S/o Pulithimma was the original owner of Sy.No. 45/3. He had 2 sons namely Siriyappa and Muddaiah. Siriyappa had a son by name Chikkanna and Muddaiah had a son by name Thimmaiah. Claimant No. 3 Nagaraj is son of Chikkanna. Ex.P.29 is the transfer certificate in-respect of claimant No. 3, which discloses that father name is mentioned as Chikkanna.
.16. It is the specific case of the claimant No. 3 that he is the son of Chikkanna and he is entitled for compensation 11 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 amount. On the other hand, the claimant No. 1 has contended that Chikkanna S/o late. Siriyappa had mortgaged 1 acre 24 guntas in-favour of Muddaiah S/o late. Kempina Chikkanna on 19.11.1954 and subsequently the said Chikkanna had sold the property to Muddaiah S/o late.
Kempina Chikkanna. During his life time, he was in possession and enjoyment of the property and so, they are entitled for compensation amount.
.17. The claimant No. 3 has been examined as PW.1. He has stated that he is the owner of acquired land measuring 1 acre 24 guntas in Sy.No. 45/3B. He has relied upon Ex.P.1 to P.28. Ex.P.1 is the Genealogical tree of family of Naga S/o Pulithimma. It corroborates the contention of claimant No. 1 and claimant No. 3 with regard to the family members. Ex.P.2 is the RTC Extract, which is similar to Ex.P.36. In Col No. 9 name of Naga S/o Pulithimma and in col. No. 9 it is mentioned as Mudda, Naga S/o Pulithimma for the year 1969-70 to 72-73. Ex.P.3 is similar to Ex.P.37. In Col. No. 9 it is mentioned that name of Naga S/o Pulithimma and in Col. No. 12 for the year 1975-76, it is mentioned as 12 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 Nagana Mommaga Mudda Thimma - Muddaiah S/o Chikkanna. From the year 1977-78 till 1979 it is mentioned as Thimma, Muddaiah. Ex.P.4 is the RTC Extract which is similar to Ex.P.40. In Col No. 9 name of Naga S/o Pulithimma has been rounded off and it is mentioned as Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna relating to RR No. 594 measuring 1 acre 23 guntas. In Col. No. 12(2) it is mentioned the name of Thimma measuring 1 acre 23 guntas , Muddaiah measuring 1 acre 23 guntas for the year 1979-80 to 1983-84. Ex.P.7 (Ex.P.41) is the RTC Extract in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3B and at Col. No. 9 it is mentioned as Muddaiah S/o late. Kempina Chikkanna. At Col. No. 10, it is mentioned as ADLRMPR 1328/88 dated 08.07.88. At Col No. 12(2) for the period from 1989-90 to 1993-94 as Muddaiah measuring 1 acre 23 guntas. Ex.P.5, 6, 8, 46, 47 are the RTC Extracts for the year from 1994 to 2010-11. In Col. No. 9 and 12(2) it is mentioned as BDA.
.18. Ex.P.10 is the Aakar bandh in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3 measuring 1 hectar 28 ares. Ex.P.11 is the Hissa survey in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3 measuring 0.65 ares, 13 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 wherein name of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna has been mentioned and in the remarks column it is mentioned as ADLR MPR BS 28/87-88. Ex.P.12 is the survey original tippani in-respect of Sy.No. 45. Ex.P.13 and 14 are the survey original pakka tippani in-respect of Sy.No. 45. Ex.P.15 is the survey original pakka tippani in-respect of Sy.No. 45. Ex.P.16 to 18 are the survey original prati in-respect of Sy.No.
45. Ex.P.19 is the survey tippani Ex.P.13 to 19 are not readable. Ex.P.20 and 21 are the Hissa survey tippani. Ex.P.22 is the request given by claimant No. 3 to furnish RR book from 1980 to 2000 in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3A, 45/3B. It contain endorsement survey no Tippani available for this survey number in issue and pakka data base.
.19. Ex.P.23 is the death certificate of Thimmaiah. It discloses that he died on 20.09.2010 and his father name is mentioned as Muddaiah. Ex.P.24 is the death certificate of Shankarachari S. He died on 11.08.2017 and name of his father is mentioned as Seebachari.
.20. Ex.P.25 is the partition deed dated 26.07.1975. In the said document, it is mentioned that " ಸರಯಪಪನ ಮಗ ಚಕಕಣಣ 14 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 ಮತತತ ಎರಡನನನ ಲನನಟಮತದದಯಯ ರವರ ಮಗ ತಮಮಯಯ ಆದ ನನವವಗಳಳ ಈ ಕನಳಕಕಡ ಪಕಚನಯತದನರರ ಸನನದನನದಲಲ ಮನಡಕನಕಕಡ ಪಕಚನಯತ ಪನರಕತತತ ಕಕಮ ಏನನಕದರನ. From the document, it is seen that the properties are partitioned on the date mentioned in the said document. The document requires registration.
.21. In 1988(1) KLJ 583 (Anand Setty Vs. Chowda Setty) Our Hon'ble Court has held that:
"Unregistered palupatti or memorandum of partition can be admitted in evidence for the purpose of proving the factum of partition but never for the purpose of proving contents or even possession of the properties mentioned therein.
In view of the above decision Ex.P.25 cannot be looked into to see whether claimant No. 3 is possession of Sy.No. 45/3B measuring 1 acre 23 guntas. In pursuance of the partition there has been no mutation. On looking to the document it appears to be created for the purpose of case.
.22. Ex.P.26 is the mutation, which discloses that Sy.No. 45/3A and 45/3B along with the other properties have been mutated and vested with the B.D.A. Ex.P.27 is the endorsement given by Tahsildar Grade II, Bengaluru South 15 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 Taluka, Bengaluru in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3B stating that IL and RR register are not available. Ex.P.28 is the Encumbrance certificate for the period from 01.01.1960 to 31.05.1989 which discloses nil encumbrance in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3B.
.23. During cross-examination PW 1 has stated that subsequent to division between Siriyappa and Muddaiah khatha and RTC Extract have not been made in their names. He has denied the suggestion that as per Ex.P.4, sale has been made in-favour of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna. To the question as to what document he has produced to prove title, he has stated under Ex.P.15 they have got the property. Ex.P.15 is the resurvey tippani, wherein it is mentioned as Naga S/o Pulithimma, Muddaiah S/o Naga and Siriyappa S/o Naga. It is undisputed fact that Siriyappa and Muddaiah are the sons of Naga. It is undisputed fact that Siriyappa and Muddaiah are the sons of Naga and they have got 1 acre 23 guntas each.
.24. PW.1 has stated that RTC Extract stands in the name of his father. Ex.P.3 is the RTC Extract. When it is 16 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 suggested in Ex.P.3 that it is mentioned as Muddaiah S/o Chikkanna and Chikkanna S/o Siriyappa, he has stated that his junior uncle son has misled them. He has stated that as per Ex.P.25 survey document made in the name of his grand father. He admits that as per Ex.P.25, there is no changed entries either in name of grand father or in the name of his father. When it is suggested that as to whether his grand father's brother was alive in the year 1975. He pleads ignorance. He admits in Ex.P.4 that name of Thimma to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas and Muddaiah to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas have been mentioned. He admits that in Ex.P.4 it has been mentioned that Muddaiah to an extent of 1 acre 23 A.C. Gurumurthy has been entered in pursuance to the sale and that name of Naga S/o Pulithimma has been rounded off and son Thimmaiah has been entered. He admits that in Ex.P.6 Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna has been rounded of and name of B.D.A. has been entered. He admits that his father and grand father have executed Ex.P.3 registered mortgage deed in the name of claimant No. 1. However, he denied that on 27.10.1958 his father and grand 17 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 father have executed a registered sale deed. He admits that as per Ex.P.32 to 35, Muddaiah has paid tax in-respect of property. He admits that after sale from 1969-70 to 1986-87 names of Muddaiah and Thimma have been entered in the RTC Extracts. He admits that in the year 1987 after the phod, survey number has been sub-divided as Sy.No. 45/3A and 45/3B. He has stated that the said document is created document. The said entries have not been challenged by claimant No. 3. He has stated that Sy.No. 45/3B has been phoded in the year 1975 and the same has been mentioned in panchayath parikath as Sy.No. 45/3B. He admits that panchayath partikath is not registered. It is suggested that Sy.No. 45/3A has been made in the name of his junior uncle son Thimmaiah, Sy.No. 45/3 in the name of claimant No. 1 as per ADLR. PW.1 has stated that this is created document. He admits that after phodi, till land has been acquired in respect to Sy.No. 45/3A name of Thimmaiah and in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3B name of claimant No. 1 has appeared in the RTC. He admits that as per Ex.P.15, name of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna has been mentioned. He admits that 18 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 Ex.P.1 notice has been sent to the son of claimant No. 1. In Ex.P.52 Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna is mentioned as owner and the same is reflected in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3B. He admits that as per Ex.P.53, Writ Petition was filed by the claimants 1 and 7 before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and they had obtained interim stay order. In the said case, it is mentioned as Sy.No. 45/3B measuring 1 acre 23 guntas. He admits that claimant No. 1 as per Ex.P.55 has expired on 19.12.1999. He admits that son of claimant No. 1 Thimmaiah had filed Writ Appeal as per Ex.P.54 and in that survey number is mentioned as 45/3B measuring 1 acre 23 guntas. It is elicited that Thimmaiah had 2 wives namely Kariyamma and Shanthamma. That he has studied up to 9 th standard and working in the Department of police as musician. He admits that legal heirs of claimant No. 1 is correct. He has stated that proceedings before ADLR is created. He has denied the suggestion that proceedings before the ADLR had taken place. The claimant No. 1 and his junior uncle Thimmaiah were present and on the basis of the order, the said Sy.No. 45/3A and 45/3B have been 19 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 bifurcated. He admits that in Ex.P.10 and 11, it is mentioned the survey number as 45/3A and 45/3B. In Ex.P.11 the details of ADLR order has been mentioned. He admits that in Ex.P.15 name of Siriya S/o Thimma has mentioned. His junior uncle Thimmaiah has expired on 20.09.2010. Witness identifies the photo of his junior uncle Thimmaiah in Ex.P.59. He admits the photo and signature adjacent to photo as per Ex.P.59(a). it is suggested that in Ex.P.59 signature of Thimmaiah in Ex.P.59 and signature of Thimmaiah in Ex.P.25 differs. PW.1 has stated that he does not know both signatures. He admits that he has not produced any document to show that his grand father and father had got redeemed mortgage.
.25. The SPA holder of claimants 1(a) to 1(f) has been examined as PW.2. PW.2 has relied upon Ex.P.30 mortgage deed. Under the said document, it is seen that Chikkanna S/o Siriyappa has executed the mortgage in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3 in-favour of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna in- respect of Sy.No. 45/3 measuring 1 acres 3 guntas bounded on East by land of Giri Thimmakka W/o Chikkamuddaiah, 20 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 West by land of Nagamma, South by land of Muddaiah and North by land of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna. Ex.P.31 is the registered sale deed dated 27.10.1959 executed by Chikkanna S/o Siriyappa in-favour of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3 measuring 1 acre 23 guntas for Rs. 800/-. Ex.P.32 is the tax paid receipt dated 27.05.1958 in-respect of khatha No. 57. From RTC Extract Ex.P.32, it is seen that khatha No. 57 pertains to Sy.No.45/3. Ex.P.33 is the tax paid receipt dated 03.04.1971 in-respect of khatha No. 57 paid by Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna. Ex.P.34 is the tax paid receipt dated 28.01.1971 in-respect of khatha No. 57 paid by Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna. Ex.P.35 is the tax paid receipt dated 08.06.1981 in-respect of khatha No. 57 paid by Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna. Ex.P.36 and 37 are the RTC Extracts. Ex.P.38 is the RTC Extract in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3B, in Col. No. 9 name of Naga S/o Pulithimma and in Col. No. 12(2) names of Nagana Mommaga Thimma, Muddaiah S/o Chikkanna for the year 1976-77 to 1979 have been mentioned. Ex.P.39 is the RTC Extract, in Col. No. 9 it is mentioned as Naga S/o 21 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 Pulithimma, Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna measuring 1 acre 23 guntas. Ex.P.49 is the record of rights in which Janjar No. 594 and name of Hakkukar has been mentioned. Iti s mentioned as the sale made by Chikkanna S/o Siriyappa in-favour of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna as per sale deed dated 27.10.1958 to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas. In mutation it is mentione as MR 4/58-59. So, it is clear that in pursuance to the sale deed name of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna has been entered in the revenue records. Ex.P.48 is the Index of land in-respect of Sy.No. 45/3 and in Col. No. 18 name of Naga S/o Pulithimma to an extent of 3 acres 6 guntas and in Col. No. 18 it is mentioned as Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas have been mentioned.
.26. Ex.P.41 is the RTC Extract, at col. No. 9 it is mentioned the name as Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas and in Col. No. 12(2) it is mentioned as Thimmaiah to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas and Muddaiah to an extent of 1 acre 23 guntas for the year 1985-87. It is mentioned in the said RTC Extract with regard 22 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 to ADLR MR 1328/87-88 durasti of Sy.No. 45/3. Ex.P.50 is the notice given by B.D.A. to Muddaiah claimant No. 1. Ex.P.52 is the notice issued in-favour of Muddaiah on 30.11.1999. Ex.P.53 is the interim order passed in W.P. No. 44466-68/99. From the said document, it is seen that claimant No. 1 is one of the petitioners. Ex.P.54 is the order in W.A. No. 4531-4532/2002 filed by Thimmaiah S/o Muddaiah i.e., claimant No. 1 and another person against B.D.A. The said W.A. has been dismissed. Ex.P.55 is the death certificate of Muddaiah, which discloses that he died on 19.12.1999 and his father name is mentioned as Kempina Chikkanna. Ex.P.56 is the death certificate of Thimmaiah, which discloses that he died on 09.09.2011 and his father name is mentioned as Muddaiah. Ex.P.57 is the sale deed dated 05.05.2006 executed by Thimmaiah S/o Muddaiah and others in-respect of Sy.No. 50/4. It is the case of the claimant No. 1 that signature in Ex.P.57 and in Ex.P.25 of Thimmaiah differs. Ex.P.25 is unregistered panchayath paluparikath. Ex.P.57 is certified copy of sale deed. Comparison of signature in certified copy of Ex.P.57 and Ex.P.25 cannot be 23 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 made. Ex.P.58 is the Genealogical tree of family of claimant No. 1. Ex.P.59 is the sale deed executed by Thimmaiah S/o Muddaiah in-favour of Gangadhara in-respect of Sy.No. 14. Ex.P.60 is the Special power of attorney given to PW.1 by LRs of Thimmaiah.
.27. PW.2 during his cross-examination has denied the suggestion that he has created Ex.P.60 and that signatures in Ex.P.60 are not the signatures of children of Thimmaiah. He admits that in Ex.P.33 and 34 it is mentioned as Naga S/o Pulithimma. He denied the suggestion that handwriting of Naga S/o Pulithimma and hand writing of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna are differs. He denied that name of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna has been created by him in Ex.P.33 and 34. He admits that in Ex.P.36 RTC Extract for the year 1969-73 name of Naga S/o Pulithimma has been entered. He further stated that name of Muddaiah is also mentioned as Mudda. He admits that in Ex.P.37 it is mentioned as Nagannana Mommaga Thimma, Muddaiah S/o Chikkanna; Nagannana Mommaga Thimma, Muddaiah S/o Chikkanna is mentioned. He admits that in Ex.P.40 and 41, 24 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 name of Naga S/o Pulithimma has been rounded off and Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna has been mentioned. He has denied Ex.P.42 to 44 have been created for the purpose of this case. He denied that from 1954 to 1981 khatha stands in the name of Siriyappa, Muddaiah and their children. He has denied the suggestion that there was no khatha in the name of Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna and that they had given an application to the ADLR to make khatha in his name. He has denied that ADLR has not done phodi and case has been dismissed. It is elicited that Siriyappa and Chikkanna had executed sale deed in their favour. He has denied the suggestion that writing in Ex.P.32 with regard to sl. No. 1 and 2 differs. He admits that in Ex.P.33 it is mentioned as Naga. He has further stated that name of Naga S/o Pulithimma is mentioned. He has denied that in Ex.P.36 claimant Muddaiah is none other than son of Pulithimma. PW.2 has stated that he knew from family of Muddaiah about claimant No. 2 and denied that they have executed agreement of sale in their favour.25
L.A.C. No. 27/1996 .28. From Ex.P.31 it is clear that claimant No. 1's father was purchaser of land bearing Sy.No. 45/3B measuring 1 acre 24 guntas from Siriyappa and his son Chikkanna The revenue records Ex.P.15, 38, 39, 41, 48 and 49 disclose that Muddaiah S/o Kempina Chikkanna was in possession of the property. As the land has been acquired, I am of the view that LRs of claimant No. 1 are entitled to compensation in-respect of 1 acre 24 guntas.
.29. The claimant No. 3 has failed to prove with cogent evidence that he is the owner of 1 acre 24 guntas in Sy.No. 45/3B. The claimant No. 3's father and grand father have executed sale deed in-favour of father of claimant No. 1 and they have lost their right in-respect of 1 acre 24 guntas. Hence, claimant No. 3 is not entitled for compensation.
.30. Though the L.A.O. has not sent the reference under Section 18 of L.A. Act, neither the application filed by the claimants seeking for enhancement of compensation has been sent by L.A.O. nor the claimants have led evidence with regard to the same. So, the reference filed under Section 18 26 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 of L.A. Act, does not arise. Accordingly. point No.1 is answered partly in affirmative.
.31. Point No.2: In view of my finding on point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The reference made by the respondent No.2/SLAO under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is hereby partly allowed.
LRs of claimant No. 1 are entitled to the compensation to an extent of 1 acre 24 guntas in Sy.No.45/3B of Nagadevanahalli village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka along with accrued interest thereon.
LRs of claimant No. 1 shall have to execute indemnity bonds with one surety, undertaking to re-deposit the compensation amount either in this court or in any other court, if ordered to do so, which amount they are going to receive in this case.
LRs of Claimant No.1 are entitled to interest under Section 34 of L.A. Act. The 27 L.A.C. No. 27/1996 amount already paid by L.A.O., has to be deducted.
The reference made by the respondent No.2/SLAO under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in-respect of LRs of claimant No. 2 is rejected.
The reference made by the respondent No.2/SLAO under Sections 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in-respect of claimant No. 3 is dismissed. Draw Award Accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, revised by me and after corrections, pronounced in open Court on this the 27th day of September, 2022.) (Sheila B.M.) II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge, Bangalore.
ANNEXURE
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR CLAIMANTS:
P.W.1 C. Nagaraj
P.W.2 Prakash
28
L.A.C. No. 27/1996
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE CLAIMANTS:
Ex.P.1 Genealogical tree
Ex.P.2 to 9 RTC Extracts
Ex.P.10 Aakarbandh
Ex.P.11 Hissa survey
Ex.P.12 Survey original Tippani
Ex.P.13 & 14 Survey original pakka
Ex.P.15 Re-survey Tippani
Ex.P.16 to 18 Survey original prati
Ex.P.19 Re-survey Tippani
Ex.P.20 & 21 Hissa survey Tippani
Ex.P.22 Letter dated 01.12.2011
Ex.P.23 Death certificate of Thimmaiah
Ex.P.24 Death certificate of Shankarachari
(claimant No. 2)
Ex.P.25 Panchayath parikath dated
26.07.1975 (illegible copy)
Ex.P.25(a) Typed copy of panchayath parikath
Ex.P.26 Mutation (2 sheets)
Ex.P.27 Endorsement
Ex.P.28 Encumbrance
Ex.P.29 T.C.
Ex.P.30 Registered Mortgage deed
E.P.31 Sale deed dated 27.10.1958
Ex.P.30(a) & Typed copy of Ex.P.30 and 31
31(a)
Ex.P.32 Tax paid receipt
Ex.P.33 & 34 Receipt for payment of assessment
Ex.P.35 Tax receipt
29
L.A.C. No. 27/1996
Ex.P.36 to 46 RTC Extracts
Ex.P.47 RTC Extracts (16 in numbers)
Ex.P.48 Index of land
Ex.P.49 Record of rights
Ex.P.50 Receipt patta
Ex.P.51 Intimation letter
Ex.P.52 Notice
Ex.P.53 Interim order in W.P. No. 44466-
68/1999
Ex.P.54 Judgment in W.P. No. 4531-
4532/2002
Ex.P.55 Death certificate Muddaiah
Ex.P.56 Death certificate Thimmaiah
Ex.P.57 Sale deed
Ex.P.58 Genealogical tree
Ex.P.59 & 59(a) Photo in sale deed and signature Ex.P.60 SPA
3. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENTS:
Nil
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENTS:
Nil (Sheila B.M.), II Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge Bangalore.
30 L.A.C. No. 27/1996