Karnataka High Court
Sri. S. Ningappa vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 31 March, 2022
Bench: Chief Justice, S R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5312/2019 (AA)
BETWEEN
SRI S. NINGAPPA
AGED 72 YEARS,
S/O SHIVAPPA,
R/O PURALE VILLAGE,
SHIVAMOGGA CITY - 577 203. ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI CHANDRAKANTH R. PATEL, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY,
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS-13,
CHITRADURGA-SHIVAMOGGA SECTION,
K.R. CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
AND MANAGER,
TECHNICAL AND PPP CELL
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 204.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND
THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
SHIVAMOGGA AND THE
SOLE ARBITRATOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT,
SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.
...RESPONDENTS
2
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 37(1)(C) OF THE
ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
ORDER DATED 29.03.2019 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE, SHIVAMOGGA, IN A.S.NO.6/2018 AND ALSO
TO SET ASIDE THE AWARD OF THE SOLE ARBITRATOR, THE
3RD RESPONDENT DATED 07.02.2018 PASSED IN NH.LAC
ARBT.33/2014-15 AND TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE SOLE
ARBITRATOR WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS THE AWARD IN
ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ETC.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR .J DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.03.2019 passed by the III Additional District Judge, Shivamogga, in A.S.No.6/2018 whereby, the said petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was dismissed by the Trial Court.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the material on record.
3
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the appeal and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the appellant submits that under identical circumstances, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of H.C.KUMARASWAMY vs SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY (MFA No.5302/2019 and connected matters) dated 19.07.2021, has dismissed the said appeals as devoid of merits reserving liberty in favour of the respective appellants/claimants to seek redressal of their grievance in accordance with law before the appropriate forum, if they are entitled and advised to do so. In paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 of the said decision, this Court held as under:
"9. Though the learned senior Counsel submitted that the matters relate to the perversity or patent illegality committed by the learned arbitrator, it is nothing but enhancement of compensation claimed by the appellants/claimants with respect to the subject acquired lands. This issue is no more res integra in view of the Co-ordinate Bench decision of this Court in H.M.Shankaramurthy V/s. National Highways Authority of India and Others [ILR 2010 KAR 3711] which has been followed by this Court in MFA No.7285/2015 [where one of us Hon'ble SSJ was a member] wherein, it has been held that a provision for setting aside an award contending that the 4 award is not sustainable in law on any one of the grounds other than specified in Section 34 (2) of the Act can never be construed as a provision enabling the land loser seeking for enhancement of the compensation amount as determined by the Arbitrator. Accordingly rejection of the application under Section 34 of the Act by the learned District Judge has been upheld holding that the application itself was not tenable.
10. In view of the aforesaid decision taken by this Court, enhancement of compensation sought by the claimants/appellants would not come within the purview of Section 34 of the Act as explained by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Associate Builders supra and Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd.,V/s. NHAI [(2019) 15 SCC 131].
11. We do not find any perversity or patent illegality in the impugned judgment calling for any interference by this Court exercising the power under Section 37 of the Act, 1996.
Appeals being devoid of merits stand dismissed with liberty to the appellants/claimants to seek redressal of their grievance in accordance with law before the appropriate Forum, if they are entitled and advised to do so."
It is, therefore, submitted that the present appeal also deserves to be dismissed reserving liberty in favour of the appellant in terms of the said decision. 5
4. The submission of learned counsel for the appellant is placed on record.
5. Accordingly, the present appeal is also dismissed as devoid of merits reserving liberty in favour of the appellant/claimant to seek redressal of his grievance in accordance with law before the appropriate forum, if he is entitled and advised to do so.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
JUDGE bkv