Bangalore District Court
Special Land Acquisition Officer And vs G.Paramashivaiah on 30 November, 2018
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (C.C.H. No.17)
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2018.
PRESENT:
Shri I.F. Bidari, B.Com., LL.B. (Spl)
II Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bangalore.
: L.A.C. NO.187/2005 :
PETITIONER/ : Special Land Acquisition Officer and
Competent Authority for Land
Acquisition for six laning of Hyderabad-
Bengaluru Road, NH-7
(Km.526.50 to 535 and Km 539 to 556)
PWD Compound,
K.R.Circle,
Bangalore-560 001.
(Absent)
/Vs./
RESPONDENTS : 1 G.Paramashivaiah,
S/o.Late Gangappa,
Major,
R/a.No.7, 1st Main Road,
Kempanna Layout,
Palace Guttahalli,
Bangalore-560 020.
2 G.Shadakshari,
S/o.Late Gangappa,
Major,
No.34, 1st Anjaneya Road,
Sheshadripuram,
Bangalore-560 020.
(R-2 by Sri K.V.K., Adv.)
2 L.A.C. No.187/2005
3 Sri G.Basavaraj
S/o.Late Gangappa .... since dead
represented by L.R.
Smt.Sunitha
D/o.Late G.Basavaraj,
Aged about 34 years,
R/a.No.323, Shivakrupa,
15th Cross, Sadashivanagar,
Bengaluru-560 080.
(Exparte)
:JUDGMENT:
The petitioner/ S.L.A.O., and competent authority for Land acquisition for six laning of Hyderabad-Bengaluru road, NH-7 (km.526.50 to 535 and km 539 to 556, Bengaluru (here-in-after referred as petitioner/ S.L.A.O.) have made this reference u/s. 3-H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 r/w section 151 of C.P.C., 1908.
.2. The brief facts of the case are:-
The petitioner/ S.L.A.O. has acquired 8 Guntas land in Sy.No.45/1, 2 Guntas in Sy.No.48/1 and 7 Guntas in Sy.No.125/1 situated at Hebbal Village, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, for the purpose of widening the National High Way No.7 (K.M.526.50 to 535 and 539 to 556) between Hyderabad-Bengaluru, under the National Highways Act, 1956 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act").
The National Highways authority of India (here-in-after referred as NHAI) was constituted by Act of parliament "The National Highways Authority of India Act, 1988". During acquisition proceedings, the 3 L.A.C. No.187/2005 preliminary notification u/s. 3A(1) of Act in No.S.O.1270 (E) dated 05.12.2002, is being published in Gazette of India Extraordinary dated 05.12.2002. The final notification u/s. 3D(1) & (2) of Act in No.S.O.829(E) dated 22.07.2003 has been published under Gazette of India Extraordinary notification. The petitioner/ S.L.A.O. resorting to the provisions of Act in his case No.LAQ/NH7/CA/CR/17/2003-04 and award dated 16.02.2004 has acquired the aforesaid land along with other lands, for the purpose of widening of NH-7 road. The petitioner/S.L.A.O., quantified and awarded an amount of Rs.14,37,480/- in-respect of 8 guntas land in Sy.No.45/1, Rs.3,59,370/- in-respect of 2 guntas land in Sy.No.48/1 and Rs.125795/- in-respect of land in Sy.No.125/1 respectively. The petitioner/ S.L.A.O., determined the value of the structure situated in Sy.No.45/1 at Rs.2,00836/- for the structures in Sy.No.48/1, 125/1 at Rs.2,04,603/- hence in all the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., has awarded total compensation of Rs.34,60,084/- in the aforesaid acquired land. The respondent No.1 did file requisition before the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., to release the compensation amount awarded to the aforesaid acquired land in Sy.No.48/1 and 125/1 of Hebbal village, contending that he is an owner of the said acquired land with structures existed thereon and filed the petition in this regard on 25.11.2004, before the S.L.A.O. The respondent No.2 did file petition dated 25.11.2004 4 L.A.C. No.187/2005 before the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., requesting to release 50% compensation awarded to the acquired land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, contending that he has jointly purchased the acquired land 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 along with Maheshwaraiah through a sale deed dated 29.11.1979. The deceased respondent No.3 did file the petition before the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., dated 20.11.2004, praying to deposit the compensation awarded to the aforesaid acquired lands, contending that the dispute with-regard to the acquired land is pending. Thus, the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., considering the rival contentions taken by the respondents 1 and 2, deceased respondent No.3, with-regard to the title of the aforesaid acquired land and apportionment of the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land made the instant reference u/s. 3-H (4) Act r/w section 151 of C.P.C., with a prayer to pass suitable orders as to who are entitle to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired lands and apportion the same to the persons legally entitle to receive the same.
.3. Thereafter receipt of the reference u/s. 3-H(4) of Act r/w section 151 of C.P.C., same is being registered on the file of this court in L.A.C. No.187/2005. Pursuant to the service of notice from this court, the petitioner/S.L.A.O., and the respondents 1 to 3 did 5 L.A.C. No.187/2005 appear before this court, but the respondents had not filed the claim statement. Therefore, the reference was closed on 05.04.2008. Thereafter, the respondent No.1 G. Paramashivaiah did file Civil Misc. No.402/2008 under order IX rule 9 of C.P.C., against the petitioner/S.L.A.O., and respondents 1 to 3. This court through order dated 22.04.2010, allowed the said petition filed under order IX rule 9 of C.P.C., consequently, set aside the order dated 05.04.2008 passed by this court in this L.A.C. No.187/2005, taken for trial afresh and pursuant to the service of notice by this court, the petitioner/S.L.A.O., and the respondents appeared through their respective counsel. The respondent No.2 died during pendency of the case, consequently, his LR has been brought on record. This court recorded the evidence of respondent No.1. The respondents 2 and 3 had not filed the claim statements and not lead evidence. The petitioner/ S.L.A.O., not lead the evidence, this court on hearing both sides, through judgment dated 06.04.2017 partly allowed the petition u/s. 3-H(4) of Act r/w section 151 of C.P.C., where-under, it was held that the respondent No.1 G. Paramashivaiah is entitle to receive the compensation amount of Rs.18,21,768/- awarded in-respect of the acquired Sy.Nos.48/1 measuring 2 guntas and 7 guntas in-respect of Sy.No.125/1 of Hebbal village. This court in the judgment and award dated 06.04.2017 in this L.A.C. No.187/2005 directed the 6 L.A.C. No.187/2005 petitioner/S.L.A.O., to take necessary legal steps as to the apportionment of compensation amount of Rs.16,38,316/- deposited in the Union Bank of India, J.P. Nagara branch, Bengaluru, in- respect of the acquired land bearing Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, as observed in the body of the said judgment and further held that the respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and LR of respondent No.3 Smt. Sunitha are at liberty to take necessary legal steps to receive the deposited compensation amount in accordance with law. The respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari subsequent to the aforesaid judgment and award dated 06.04.2017 passed by this court in L.A.C. No.187/2005, got re-opened the petition (reference) u/s. 3-H(4) of Act r/w section 151 of C.P.C., for consideration of his right to receive the compensation, in the acquired land measuring 8 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village. This court reopened this case in L.A.C. No.187/2005 at the request of the respondent No.2 and issued notice afresh to the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., as well, respondent No.3. The petitioner/ S.L.A.O. and also the respondent No.3 remained absent, in-spite of service of notice afresh after reopening of the reference. The respondent No.2 has filed his claim statement dated 01.09.2018, wherein, among others, has averred that originally the land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas of Hebbal village, in Sy.No.45/1 was belongs to the ownership of K. Kempaiah. The said 7 L.A.C. No.187/2005 K. Kempaiah had sold the said land in-favour of Keshavamurthy under a registered sale deed dated 22.03.1972 and subsequently, the said Keshavamurthy for his family legal necessity has sold the said 1 acre 5 guntas land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, in-favour of respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and his brother Maheshwaraiah under a registered sale deed dated 20.11.1979 for consideration. Thus, the respondent No.2 and his brother Maheshwaraiah become the absolute joint owners and were possessing and enjoying the same as owners of the said land. The names of respondent No.2 and his brother were recorded in the revenue records of the said property. The respondent No.2 and his brother got converted the aforesaid land from agricultural to non-agricultural purpose. It is averred that the respondent No.2 and his brother in oral partition, partitioned the aforesaid land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, where-under, 0.22.08 guntas each was allotted to the respondent No.2 and his brother, consequently, their names came to be mutated in the revenue records as per MR No.29/2005-06. Subsequently, the aforesaid property came under the limits of CMC, Byatarayanapura. The name of respondent No.2 was mutated in the khata, in-respect of 22.8 guntas allotted to his share and he was possessing and enjoying the same as an owner, in the mean-time, the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., has acquired the aforesaid 8 L.A.C. No.187/2005 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village for widening of National Highways. Thus, the respondent No.2 is an interested person to the extent of 50% of the aforesaid acquired land measuring 8 guntas in Sy.No.45/1, as such, he is entitle to receive the compensation amount to the extent of 50% out of Rs.16,38,316/- awarded to the acquired land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village. Thus, prayer of the respondent No.2 is to release the compensation of the said acquired land in his favour as prayed.
.4. The respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari, to substantiate his claim has got examined himself as RW.1. The documents at Exs.R.1 to 6 are marked on behalf of the respondent No.2.
.5. I have heard Sri. KVK the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Perused the records.
.6. The points that would arise for consideration of this court are:
1) Whether the respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari S/o late. H. Gangappa proves that he is entitle to receive 50% compensation amount, out of the 9 L.A.C. No.187/2005 compensation amount of Rs.16,38,316/-
awarded in-respect of 8 guntas non-
agricultural land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, Kasaba Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluka, at this stage?
2) What order or award?
.7. My findings on the above points are:
Point No.1 : In the negative, Point No.2 : As per the final order, for the following:
REASONS .8. Point No.1:- The RW.1 G. Shadakshari S/o late. H. Gangappa, who is a respondent No.2, has filed an affidavit in lieu of his chief-examination, reiterating most of his claim statement averments. The documents at Ex.R.1 to 6 are marked during evidence of RW.1. The RW.1 G. Shadakshari in his chief- examination, among others has averred that originally the land bearing Sy.No.45/1 measuring 1 acre 5 guntas was belongs to one K. Kempaiah and subsequently, the said K. Kempaiah had sold the said land in-favour of Keshavamurthy under a registered sale deed dated 22.03.1972 and subsequently, the name of said Keshavamurthy was recorded in the revenue records of the said property and he was in possession as owner of the said land. The RW.1 further states that Keshavamurthy for his family legal 10 L.A.C. No.187/2005 necessity has sold the aforesaid land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 through a registered sale deed dated 20.11.1979 in- favour of himself and his brother G. Maheshwaraiah, for consideration, since purchase, he himself and his brother were in possession and enjoyment of the same as owners and their names were recorded in the revenue records of the said property. The Ex.R.1 is a certified copy of the registered sale deed dated 29.11.1979, where-under, M. Keshavamurthy for himself and his two minor sons namely K.Mohan Kumar and K. Pradeep Kumar, represented as their minor guardian has sold the land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, Bengaluru North Taluka, situated within the boundaries mentioned therein, for consideration amount of Rs.38,000/-, in-favour of respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and G. Maheshwaraiah sons of late. H. Gangappa.
The recitals in Ex.P.1 evidences that the said M. Keshavamurthy did purchase the said land mentioned in Ex.R.1 from its previous owner Kempaiah through a registered sale deed dated 22.03.1972. Thus, the contents of Ex.R.1 and the oral evidence of RW.1 corroborates the claim statement averments of respondent No.2, to the effect that he himself along with his brother G. Maheshwaraiah had purchased the land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, from Keshavamurthy for consideration. The RW.1 in his chief- 11 L.A.C. No.187/2005 examination has stated that thereafter purchase they have got converted the aforesaid purchased land into non-agricultural industrial purpose. The Ex.R.6 is a copy of conversion sanction certificate, issued in the Tahsildar office, Bengaluru North Taluka, Bengaluru, where-under, the aforesaid land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, has been converted into non-agricultural industrial purpose, subject to the condition mentioned therein. This Ex.R.6 and the evidence of RW.1 corroborates the claim statement averments of respondent No.2 that thereafter purchase of the land mentioned in Ex.R.1, they have got converted the same into non-agricultural industrial purpose. The RW.1 in his chief-examination states that he himself and his brother had entered into the oral partition, in-respect of the land, in Sy.No.45/1, where-under, 0.22.08 guntas each was allotted to each of them and MR No.29/2005-06 has been mutated in this record and subsequently, the said property was coming under CMC, Byatarayanapura, consequently, his name was recorded in the khata of CMC, issued by Byatarayanapura CMC and he was in possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid property allotted to him, in the mean- time, the S.L.A.O., has acquired the land in Sy.No.45/1 and he is interested person and entitle to receive 50%, out of the compensation amount of Rs.16,38,316/- awarded to the acquired 12 L.A.C. No.187/2005 land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village. There is no dispute that the land to the extent of 8 guntas non-agricultural land in Sy.No.45/1 is being acquired by the petitioner/S.L.A.O., as could be seen from the records and reference made by the petitioner/S.L.A.O., u/s. 3-H(4) of Act r/w section 151 of C.P.C., and the compensation of Rs.16,38,316, has been awarded, in-respect of the said land and the said land is transmitted along with the reference and it is deposited in F.D., in the bank. The RW.1 in support of his claim, to claim 50% of the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land 8 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, in-addition to Exs.R.1 and 6, has produced and got marked encumbrance certificate in Form No.15 at Ex.R.2 for the period from 01.04.1978 to 31.03.2004 in-respect of the aforesaid Sy.No.45/1 land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas of Hebbal village. The Ex.R.3 is a certified copy of MR No.29/2005-06 of Hebbal village, wherein, out of the land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas land, the extent of 22.08 guntas each has been recorded in the name of respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and his brother G. Maheshwaraiah. This Ex.R.3 also evidences that the said MR No.29/2005-06 has been effected and mutated as per partition deed dated 21.06.2006, entered between respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and his brother G. Maheshwaraiah. The RTC extracts (19 in numbers) in-respect of Sy.No.45/1 land measuring 1 acre 5 13 L.A.C. No.187/2005 guntas of Hebbal village, for the period from 2001-02 to 2017-18 together are marked at Ex.R.4. The names of G. Shadakshari and G. Maheshwaraiah have been recorded in the kabjedar's column to the extent of 22 and 22.08 guntas respectively and whereas, the land to the extent of 8 guntas has been recorded in the name of National Road Authority. The Ex.P.5 is a copy of self declaration in form No.III submitted by the respondent No.2, in Byatarayanapura CMC (Nagara Sabhe), Bengaluru with-regard to the house site mentioned therein. Admittedly, the respondent No.2 has not produced the partition deed dated 21.06.2006, under which, the respondent No.2 and his brother G. Maheshwaraiah said to have been entered into the partition in land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas of syno,45/1 of Hebbal village, mentioned in Ex.R.3. The respondent No.2 for entitlement of 50% compensation awarded to 8 guntas acquired land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village has to adduce cogent evidence that he was an owner to the extent of 50% of the land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village. The records disclose that in the objection statement dated 20.04.2011 filed by the respondent No.1 G. Paramashivaiah in L.A.C. No.187/2005, in para No.6 has contended that the land bearing syo.145/1 measuring 1 acre 5 guntas situated at Hebbal village, has been purchased by G. Shadakshari and G. Maheshwaraiah jointly 14 L.A.C. No.187/2005 under a registered sale deed dated 29.11.1979, however, the respondent No.1 came to know that both of them have sold their respective shares to the 3rd party and this fact is also being stated by the PW.1 G. Paramashivaiah, in his chief-examination affidavit at para No.5 filed in lieu of his chief examination on 10.06.2014, in this L.A.C. No.187/2005. The award copy dated 16.02.2014 passed by the petitioner/S.L.A.O., where-under acquired the land, in question, in Sy.No.45/1 along with other lands mentioned therein is on record. This copy of award dated 16.02.2014 passed by the S.L.A.O., discloses that before the S.L.A.O., during enquiry, Basavaraju, who is a deceased respondent No.3 has stated before the S.L.A.O., that as per the settlement deed cum family settlement dated 14.03.1990, 9 guntas each has been allotted to their family members namely (1) Basavaraju; (2) G. Maheshwaraiah (3)Manjunatha (4) Channamma; (5)G. Shadakshari and on the basis of the same, the partition has been effected between family members on 14.09.1996 and in the said family partition, the entire 1 acre 5 guntas has been allotted to his share (i.e., Basavaraju), hence, prayed to release the entire compensation of acquired 8 guntas land in his favour and to enhance the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,200/- per sq. feet. The said copy of award also discloses that Basavaraju has stated before the S.L.A.O., that the respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari 15 L.A.C. No.187/2005 has filed the suit in O.S.No.3308/1998 in the City Civil Court, Bengaluru against G. Maheshwaraiah, seeking 50% right in the land measuring 1 acre 5 guntas of Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, same is pending. My learned predecessor in the judgment dated 06.04.2017 passed in L.A.C. No.187/2005, in the body of judgment observed with-regard to these facts and in para No.17 of the said judgment, proceeded to observe that in this case, that G. Maheshwaraiah S/o H. Gangappa, Basavaraju, G. Manjunatha, G. Shadakshari and Smt. Channamma have not made them as parties to this proceedings. Without impleading them as necessary parties, the petitioner has filed this petition. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it was directed to the petitioner to initiate separate proceedings against the interested persons pertaining to land bearing Sy.No.45/1 acquired by the petitioner and till then the amount kept in F.D., has to be continued till taking necessary steps by the petitioner. This apart in the relevant portion also there is clear order in this regard. Therefore, it is worth to quote the contents of para Nos.17 and 18 of the judgment dated 06.04.2017, in L.A.C. No.187/2005, which reads as under:
"17. But in this case, Maheswaraiah S/o.Late H.Gangappa, Basavaraju, G.Manjunatha, G.Shadakshari and Smt.Channamma are not made as parties to this proceedings. Without impleading them as necessary parties in this proceedings, the petitioner/ has filed this 16 L.A.C. No.187/2005 petition. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it is just and necessary to direct the petitioner/ to initiate separate proceedings against interested persons pertaining to land bearing Sy.No.45/1 acquired by the petitioner/ and till then the amount kept in F.D. has to be continued till taking necessary steps by the petitioner/ and the office is also directed to keep all the records till taking necessary steps in this regard. As such, point No.2 is answered accordingly.
18. Point No.3 :- For the aforesaid reasons and discussions, I proceed to pass the following:-
: ORDER :
The reference made by the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., under Section 3-H (4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to the extent of claim of respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari S/o late. H. Gangappa, at this stage, as claimed in his claim statement is hereby rejected and with a direction that the petitioner/ S.L.A.O., shall have to take necessary steps as to the apportionment of compensation amount of Rs.16,38,316/- deposited in the Union Bank of India, J.P. Nagara branch, Bengaluru, in-respect of the land bearing Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, as observed in the judgment dated 06.04.2017 passed in L.A.C. No.187/2005 and the respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and LR of respondent No.3 i.e., Smt. Sunitha, are at liberty to take necessary steps to receive the deposited compensation amount, in-respect of the said land, in accordance with law, as ordered in judgment dated 06.04.2017 in L.A.C. No.187/2005, till then, the office is directed to preserve all records pertaining to this case.
Draw an award accordingly."17 L.A.C. No.187/2005
.9. Admittedly, the respondent No.2, who was appearing through his counsel, since beginning in the proceedings in L.A.C. No.187/2005 and the same is also being mentioned in the judgment dated 16.04.2017 passed in this L.A.C. No.187/2005, to the effect that the respondent No.2 did appear through his counsel Sri.KVK, who have filed power for this respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari, also did file power for respondent No.2 earlier to reopening of this L.A.C. No.187/2005, as such, it is made clear that the respondent No.2 and his learned counsel Sri. KVK, were very well knowing about the fact that unless parties, who are necessary to adjudicate the dispute with-regard to the compensation awarded to 8 guntas land in Sy.No.45/1, the said dispute cannot be adjudicated effectively, as such, the petitioner was directed to take steps in that regard and also the respondent No.2 and LR of deceased respondent No.3 were given liberty to take necessary legal steps to receive the compensation amount, in accordance with law, in-respect of acquired 8 guntas land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, despite that the respondent No.2 has not made (1) G. Maheshwaraiah; (2) G. Manjunatha; (3) Channamma as parties, at this stage, in this L.A.C. No.187/2005, after reopening of the reference u/s. 3-H(4) of Act r/w section 151 of C.P.C., for adjudication of his right in the said acquired land as ordered in the judgment dated 06.04.2017 passed 18 L.A.C. No.187/2005 in this case as cited supra. Therefore, it is made clear that unless the said persons, who are also said to be having interest in the acquired land, in question, measuring 8 guntas in Sy.No.45/1, it is not possible to adjudicate the extent of right of respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari, in the said acquired land, much less, his alleged 50% right to receive the compensation awarded to the said acquired land. This apart, the respondent No.2 while deposing as RW.1 in this L.A.C. No.187/2005 and also in his statement objections filed in this petition discussed above, has stated that he came to know that both respondent No.2 and his brother G. Maheshwaraiah have sold their land purchased under sale deed dated 29.11.1979 measuring 1 acre 5 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village and subject matter of the alleged right of respondent No.2 is a portion of acquired land in Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village. Under the circumstances, it is not clear as whether the respondent No.2 along with his brother G. Maheshwaraiah have sold the property purchased by them under the sale deed dated 29.11.1979, certified copy of which is marked at Ex.R.1. Thus, the appreciation of oral evidence of RW.1 and documentary evidence marked at Exs.R1 to 4 and the materials on record discussed above, is not proving, at this stage, that the respondent No.2 has 50% right out of the compensation amount of Rs.16,38,316/- awarded to 8 guntas land in Sy.No.45/1 and unless 19 L.A.C. No.187/2005 the respondent No.2 or the petitioner/S.L.A.O., complied the direction issued by this court in the judgment dated 16.04.2017 passed in L.A.C. No.187/2005, the respondent No.2, at this stage, is not entitle to seek the relief, much les as sought in this claim statement. Thus, I hold point No.1 in the negative for consideration.
.10. POINT NO.2: In view of my finding on the afore- mentioned point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The reference made by the petitioner /S.L.A.O., under section 3-H (4) of the National Highways Act, 1956 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to the extent of claim of respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari S/o late. H. Gangappa, at this stage, as claimed in his claim statement is hereby rejected and with a direction that the petitioner/S.L.A.O., shall have to take necessary steps as to the apportionment of compensation amount of Rs.16,38,316/- deposited in the Union Bank of India, J.P. Nagara branch, Bengaluru, in-respect of the land bearing Sy.No.45/1 of Hebbal village, as observed in the judgment dated 06.04.2017 passed in L.A.C. No.187/2005 and the respondent No.2 G. Shadakshari and LR of respondent No.3 i.e., Smt. Sunitha, are at liberty to take necessary steps to receive the deposited 20 L.A.C. No.187/2005 compensation amount, in-respect of the said land, in accordance with law, as ordered in judgment dated
06.04.2017 in L.A.C. No.187/2005, till then, the office is directed to preserve all records pertaining to this case. Draw an award accordingly.
(Dictated to judgment writer, transcribed and computerized by him, revised by me and after corrections, pronounced in the open Court on this the 30th day of November, 2018.) (I.F. Bidari), II Addl. C.C. & S. Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR CLAIMANTS: Nil
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE CLAIMANTS: Nil
3.WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENTS:
RW.1 : G. Shadakshari
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
Ex.R.1 : Certified copy of registered sale deed Ex.R.2 : Encumbrance certificate Ex.R.3 : Extract of MR No.29/2005-06 Ex.R.4 : RTC extracts (19 in numbers) 21 L.A.C. No.187/2005 Ex.R.5 : Copy of self-declaration in Form No.III Ex.R.6 : Copy of conversion order (I.F. Bidari), II Addl. C.C. and Spl. Judge, Bangalore.