Karnataka High Court
Smt.Yashodamma Since Dead By Her Lrs vs The Spl Lao/Assistant Commissioner on 21 October, 2011
Bench: N.K.Patil, C.R.Kumaraswamy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 215° DAY OF OCTOBER. 201 7 . PRESENT | THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NK.PATIL AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE c.R. KUMARASWAMY MLE 16 BRof 2010 Ac) Between: Smt. Yashodamuma., Since dead by her LRs: I. smi. N.Vatsala, W/o. Sri. NUK Pai Aged about SE yes eg: 2. Sri. NK, Nay asimnha' Wwe Tigar, S/o. Late! N, Krishna lyen Aged about 59 year 8. 3. SrioN i, Krishna Iyengar. S/o, Late N. Krishna lyengar, Aged about 59 years. . Sr. Ni. K Nagaraj lyengar, S/o. Le te N Krishna ive Aged about 59 years. ngar. "5, Smi.N.K.Rajalakshmi, ~ W/o. Yoga Narasimha ~. Aped about 50 years. Rat. Nic 5 SSG Sard Slage, | lock, Basaveshwara Nagar, Bangalore-79, 6. Sri. N.K.Seshadri Ivenygar, S/o. Late N. Krishna Ivengar. Aged about 47 years. Appellants 1.2.3 and 5 are Rfat. No.12, Kalika Sathya Narayana Lavout, 3° Main. Mahalakshmipuram, Gangalore-86. (Sy Sri. DLR. Ravishankar. for M/s. Lex Nexus, Advocates} And: 1. 'The Spl. LA O/ Assistant Commissioner, Mysore Sub Division A, Mysore. The Executive Officer, cane ori. Srikantés] mwaraswainy Tenisle Nan} angud. | : .. Responde Tes (By Sri Sangameshc ct. 'p el 3 BGA for Ri Sri. TN Raghur pathy. Advocate for Ra) . This. MLF.AJis- Med under Section 54(1) of the LA Act against the Judgment and Award dated 22/06/2009 passed ia. 14/2004 on the file of ine Civil Judge(Sr. Dn), partly allowing the reference pelition for 7 Japensation : and seeking further enhancernent of F 0 This Appeal Coming on for Hearing this day, AN Le PATIL J., delivered the following: one Appellan is BS SONOS SERA SDSS "proper JUDGMENT:
This appeal by the appellants-claimants is. directed against the umpugned Judgment and (Sr.Dn.j}. Nanjangud. thereinafier ca! le 1 e 5 Rel eren ce Ce ost! for short).
2, The Reference Cours, by its - Judgment and Award, has fixed thie market value. of the property in question at %290/- per 'Sq.ft. witl)comsequential benefits. Being aggrieved. by the said Judement and Award, the claimants have: filed this appeal, contending that the market value fixed-by, the' Reference Court is on lower side and is Hable to be enhanced.
3. The brict facts of the case are: The claimants are egal representatives of the deceased Smt. Yashodamma. . Phe property of the deceased Smt, Yashodamma. bearing Assessment No,1582 measuring 451.98 Sq. Meters and / bearing Assessment No.1583 measuring 110.63 Sq. Meters with buildings and coconut trees thereon, totally ing 6053.67 Sq. feel. situated at Nani SESE ESS EEN SAN FNS ae has been notified and acquired by the competent authority of ihe State for the = purpose of development of. Sri orikanieshwara Temple. Nanjangud, vide. Preliminary, Land Aequisition Act. published in the Karnataka Gazelle on ZO.11.2001 followed by Final Notification. issued under - Olficer. issued notices under Sections: 9 ard 10 af the LA. Act, calling objections and. claint. of ihe claimants and thereafter, .passed the award. fixing.the market value at and also fixed. the value of coconut trees one f94/- per Sq.
open swell anc existing buildings totally at 713.81.947/-. Not oa bre being sa sfied with the..ciarket value fixed by the Land Acquisition-Olficer, clairiants have filed an application under Fr he ection 18 (1) of the Act. for enhancement of compensation swith a request.to refer the matter fo the Reference Court and accordiy ii was referred to the jurisdictional Reference Court and rumbered as LAC 14 (2004. The Rererence Court, im turn. after assessing the oral and 'documentary evidence and other material available on file. £ a .
ra ormirunesarnaanitnnnt Pa é sa aa Ge Sees taking into consideration: Une purpose for which it has been acquired and its potentiality and placing reNance 1 E 2x BP) and giving escajation at 5% allowed the said petition. fixing the marke? value ai %290/> per Sq. f. with consequential benefits. Being dis-satisfed with the market value fixed-.by the Referenés.Court, the | claimants have filed this appeal, seeking appropriate reliefs, as Stated supra.
De The rifitisal' protiad urged by the learned counsel forthe claimants is. (hat, impugned Judgment ard passed by "the Reference Court is liable to be set aside at threshold. To substantiate the said suilimission, he submitted that. as a matter of fact the Claimanits A ave Placed reliance on Exs.Pl and P2- 'certified cep ies of valuation of sites fixed by the Sub- Registrar-Nanjangud flor different areas of Nanjangud and. as per Ex.Pl, the Sub-Registrar has fixed the market value in the year 1998-99 at ?263/-Sq. Ft and per year for wwe. years: ras ES es as per Ex.PZ. the market value is fixed at $800/- per Sq. Mt for the area from Temple and therefare. the Reference Court ought to have taken the aveéraue "of. Ex.Pl and P2 and fixed the market value taking into | consideration the potentiality of the property in question which is the only source of tecome ofthe claimants as < they are running gre cery © shop ank A mint CAF nteen on it, Therefore, he su bites that. the itn pugned Judgment and Award is lie ble t o he inodified
6. As ak cs ' hie learned Additional Government Advocate cap pear Th for the respondent No.1. inter-alia contended and substantiaved the Judgement and Award passed bythe Refererive Court. Further. he submitted i that, the Referenée Court is justified in fixing the imarket, value at ©290/- per Sql. after due consideration of the oral and documentary evidence ™ ava lable on file, specifically, Ex.Pl and after giving _escalation at 5% per year for two years. Further he subn nitted that. if is not the case of the claimants that See Re the property is situated in the main road and therefore, the Reference Court js justified in: trolding that the property in question is situated within JOO M. from the temple area and that the claimanis have not produced any material to show that the said property is situated in Car Street (Rathada beedil, Therefore, he submitted that the. Referetice.. Court is» justified in determining the market at %290/ . per Sq. Ft. However, = he fairly submitéed ch at. i 1 view of ihe well settled law laid down by the Apex Court atid this Court in catena of judgments, che 'Refereiice Court ought to have given escalation at 10%. for a period of two years since the market value fixed in SEXP] is for the assessment year a 1998-29 " and the preliminary notification has been am issued in the year 2001-2002. Therefore. he submitted that the. impugned judgment and award passed by the » Reference Court may be modified in accordance with La: a EP RSC WSSU TR CSE SS
7. After having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and after careful perusal of the - oFiginal records available on file. inchiding the: mpugned Judgment and Award passed by the Reference Court, the only point that arises for our consideration is: os Whether the ma rket value fixed! by the Reference Cou rt in respect er the propert y in question is stistamable in iaw?
SB. it is not n "dispute. that. the property in question measuring 6053.67 Sq. ft has been notified and acqitireé by tie Suite for tHe benelit of the Temple. It is 'the submission. of the learned counsel for claimants that iri.t he Said property they were running a oe grocery shop and tain canteen, which is their source of " : income and tHiey are entirely depending on it. since the nas been acquired. they are not in a position 'to run their business and even if they continue fo run their business in some other place, they could | fot earn what they are carming belore the acquisition.
9. One more aspect that has to be borne im mind is that, Sri. Srikantedhwara Temple been considered as the property Department and there is a ietal 'prohthition. from constructing any miullistoried yf swithtin the racius 100 Meters in and around fee temple. Taking all' these. aspects of the matter imte. consideration. after £ reappreciation of the oral aannck documentary evidence and also taking into consideration, the "potentiality of the property, we. refx the ma ret value of the property in question ai 231 8/- per-Sq. Fi insiead ol &290/- per Sq. Ft. fixed by the Reference Cou rt.
'reasons. the appeal fled by the LQ. Por the foreguin appellant is allowed in part.
"Fhe impugned Judgment and Award dated 22/06/2009 "Un LACLNo. 14/2004 by the Civil Judge (Sr.DnJj, Nenjangad. is hereby modified. fixing the market value at T3157- per Sq. fh. with consequential benefits as envisaged under Section 22(1) of the L.A. / %290/- per Sq. Ft. fixed by the Reference Court. f YS ot afl SCS OES The respondents herein are directed to deposit the enhanced amount with statutory benefits : as expeditiously as possible, within a period (of. three:
months from the date of receip! oof a | copy of this judgment and award.
Office to draw the award-accordin ely * His needless lo clarify that, the court fee paid by the claimants over" and: above "the -- COMmpensation awarded by 'this Court. JiPany' 3h hall pe refunded to the claimants finn cabin @ ly. 7 Tac Reyistri-is directed io transmit the original records, "to "the jurisdictional Reference Court, immediately, 0 rea : " woth) TIN eee is Jae! See Le o fsu* :