Bangalore District Court
L.A.C./195/2000 on 14 March, 2022
1
L.A.C. No.195/2000
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (C.C.H. No.17)
Dated this the 14 th day of March 2022.
PRESENT:
Smt. Sheila B.M., M.Com.,LLM
II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.
: LAND ACQUISITION CASE NO.195/2000 :
CLAIMANTS :
1) Gullappa
S/o Muniveerappa
Major
Kothanuru village,
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
Since dead by LRs
1(a) Jayappa
S/o late. Gullappa
Aged about 35 years
R/at Kothanuru village
Bengaluru South Taluka
2) Jayanna
S/o Hanumanthappa
Major
R/at Vaddarapalya
Kothanuru village
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
3) Thippa Siddaiah
S/o Basanna
No.1802, 18th Main road
4th T Block
2
L.A.C. No.195/2000
Jayanagara
Bengaluru
4) Mahadeva T. Heggade
No.21/A, 11th Cross road
6th Block, Jayanagar
Bengaluru
5) B.M. Radhakrishna
No.3/84, 8th Main road
3rd cross road, Jayanagar, 3rd Block
Bengaluru.
6) Ganesh Heggade
No.21/A, 11th Cross road
6th Block,
3rd Stage, Jayanagara
Bengaluru.
7) Rajesh Bhat
No.1168/A, 18th Main road
5th Block, Rajajinagar
Bengaluru - 10.
8) Anitha M. Bhat
No.1168/A, 18th Main road
5th Block, Rajajinagara
Bengaluru -10.
9) Bharath S. Bhat
No.1168/A, 18th Main road
5th Block, Rajajinagara
Bengaluru -10.
10) Narasimhamurthy
No.1, Sanjeevini layout
Arakere, Bannerughatta road
Bengaluru
3
L.A.C. No.195/2000
11) M.B. Naresh
No.21/A, 11th Main road
6th Block, 3rd phase
J.P. Nagar
Bengaluru.
12) Ganesh G. Bhat
No.1168/A, 18th Main road
5th Block, Rajajinagara
Bengaluru -10.
13) Ganesh M. Bhat
No.3/84, 18th Main road
3rd Block, Jayanagar
Bengaluru - 11.
14) Geetha, Vamana
Bidarahalli
No.17, C/o Pradeep S. Bhat
No.1050, 133, 18th A Main road
5th Block, Rajajinagar
Bengaluru
15) Bharathi S. Bhat
No.1168/A, 18th Main road
5th Block, Rajajinagara
Bengaluru -10.
16) Nirmala Heggade
No.136, CHBS layout
18th Main road
19th cross road
Vijayanagar
Bengaluru -40
17) Pradeed S. Bhat
No.1050, 13-3, 18th main road
5th Block, Rajajinagar
Bengaluru.
4
L.A.C. No.195/2000
18) Prasad Upadyaya
Kothanuru village
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
19) Ganga S. Heggade
No.1050, 13-3, 18th main road
5th Block, Rajajinagar
Bengaluru.
20) Suresh Upadyaya
Kothanuru village
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
21) Sharada S. Bhat
No.850, 17th main road
Banashankari 2nd stage
Bengaluru -70.
22) Veena A. Murali
Kothanuru village
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
23) P. Shivakumar
No.28, 2nd cross
Mico layout, BTM 2nd stage
Bengaluru -76.
24) Rajaram Shankar Heggade
No.145, 1st floor
14th A cross,
Vyali Kaval
Bengaluru -03.
25) Anupama Ramchandra Heggade
No.635, 18th main road
14th cross, J.P. Nagar
Bengaluru -78.
5
L.A.C. No.195/2000
26) Rajaram Upadyaya
Kothanuru village
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
27) Mandakini Govindarao, Devakara
Kothanuru village
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
28) R. Lakshmi
No.296, 7th main road
10th cross, 1st Block
Jayanagar East
Bengaluru -11
29) Ganesha
S/o Muniswamappa
Major
R/at Vaddarapalya
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
30) Gangappa
S/o Lakshmaiah
R/at Raghuvanapalya
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
Since dead by LRs
30(a) Siddagangamma
W/o late. Gangappa, major
30(b) Gangaraju
S/o late. Gangappa, major
30(c) Shankar
S/o late. Gangappa, major
6
L.A.C. No.195/2000
30(d) Muniraju
S/o late. Gangappa, major
30(e) Saraswathi
D/o late. Gangappa, major
All are residing at Raghuvanapalya
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
31) Smt. Latha
W/o Gangadhar
Aged about 32 years
R/at No.4/75, 2nd A main
Ramakrishna Nagar 1st stage
Jaraganahalli
Bengaluru -78
32) Sri. Ashith S. Rao
S/o Sadasiva Rao
Aged about 37 years
R/at No.673 A, 12th cross road
7th Block, Jayanagar
Bengaluru -82
represented by General Power of
Attorney holder
Sadashiva Rao
33) Lakshmamma
W/o Muneerappa
Aged about 57 years
34) Chandra Shekar
S/o late. Muneerappa
Aged about 30 years
35) Lalitha
D/o Muneerappa
Aged about 28 years
7
L.A.C. No.195/2000
36) Kum. Pushpa
D/o late. Muneerappa
Aged about 26 years
37) Kum. Padma
D/o late. Muneerappa
Aged about 25 years
38) Smt. Jayamma
W/o late. Munithimmappa
Aged about 58 years
39) Smt. Hanumakka
W/o late. Muniyappa
Aged about 45 years
40) Smt. Gowramma
W/o late. Rajanna
Aged about 46 years
41) Smt. Sakamma
W/o late. Venkataswamy
Aged about 63 years
42) Govinda
S/o late. Dodda Marappa
Aged about 53 years
All are residing at Kothanuru village
Gottigere post
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
43) Marappa @ Venkatappa
S/o late. Dodda Marappa
Aged about 58 years
since dead by LRs
8
L.A.C. No.195/2000
43(a) Savithramma
W/o late. Marappa
major
43(b) Manjunath
S/o late. Marappa
major
43(c) Kumar
S/o late. Marappa
major
All are residing at No.27
Jambusavari Dinne
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
44) Smt. Papamma
W/o late. Gullappa
Aged about 65 years
Since dead by LRs already on record
45) Smt. Channamma
W/o late. Muniyappa, Major
46) Srinivasa
S/o late. Muniyappa
Major
47) Manjunatha
S/o late. Muniyappa
Major
48) Smt. Neelamma @ Lakshmi
D/o late. Muniyappa,
Major
9
L.A.C. No.195/2000
All are residing at Vaddarapalya
J.P. Nagar, 8th phase, Kothnur Dinne
Gottigere post, Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
49) V.M. Ramappa
S/o late. Motappa
Major,
R/at Jambu Savari Dinne
J.P. Nagar, 8th phase
Gottigere post
Bengaluru.
50) Ramakrishna
S/o late. Munishamappa
Major
R/at Vaddarapalya
Gottigere post
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
51) Nagamma
D/o late. Munishyamappa
W/o Ramu,
Major
R/at No.60, Konanakunte cross,
Vasanthapura main road
Bengaluru -62.
52) Rajanna
S/o late. Muniswamappa
Major
R/at Vaddarapalya
Gottigere post
Uttarahalli Hobli
Bengaluru South Taluka
(Sri. YRS, Advocate for LR of C-1)
(Sri. DKB, Advocate for C-29)
10
L.A.C. No.195/2000
( Sri. YRS, Advocate for LR of C-30)
( Sri. LKR, Advocate for C-31)
( Sri. NLA, Advocate for C-32)
( Sri.HSS, Advocate for C-33)
( Sri.CN, Advocate for C-34 to 42)
( Sri. CHM, Advocate for LRs of C-43)
( Sri. KM, Advocate for C-44 to 48)
( Sri. HG, Advocate for C-49 to 52)
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENTS :
1) The Commissioner
B.D.A., Kumara Park West
Bengaluru.
2) The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
B.D.A., Kumara Park West
Bengaluru.
(By Sri. MG. Advocate)
: JUDGMENT :
The Special Land Acquisition Officer has sent this reference under Sections 30 and 31 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (here-in-after referred as L.A. Act), for apportionment of compensation amount.
.2. The brief facts of the case is that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 3 acres 17 guntas of Kothanuru village , Uttarahalli Hobli has been aquired 11 L.A.C. No.195/2000 for the purpose of extension of J.P. Nagara 8 th stage. Preliminary notification was issued on 26.05.1988. The L.A.O. has passed the award on 22.09.1995 for a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- per acre for dry land, Rs.1,20,000/- per acre for garden land and Rs.55,000/- per acre for kharab land. As there was dispute with regard to the title of the interested persons, the award amount of Rs.8,19,334/- deposited in the Court. The said amount has been kept in the Karnataka Bank, City Civil Court branch, Bengaluru.
.3. After receipt of the reference, this Court issued notice to both parties. In pursuance to the notice, LR of claimant No.1, claimant No.29, LR of claimant No.30, 31 to 42, Lr of claimant No.43 and claimants 49 to 52 have entered appearance through their advocates.
.4. The LRs of claimant No.1 Gullappa have filed claim statement stating that Gullappa had a wife by name Papamma and the said Gullappa died in the year 2000 and his wife Papamma died on 11.12.2007. The said Gullappa and Papamma had 4 sons namely (1) 12 L.A.C. No.195/2000 Muniyappa, who died in the year 1988, (2) Jayappa; (3) Venkatesh and (4) Govindaraju, who died on 18.02.2007.
.5. It is stated that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village measuring 4 acres 18 guntas out of 4 acres 18 guntas, 2 acres 8 guntas originally belonged to one Chinnamma, the mother of Papamma, mother-in- law of Gullappa. Smt. Chinnamma gifted 2 acres 8 guntas in-favour of her daughter Papamma under a gift deed dated 21.12.1949. The said Papamma was the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the land, she was exercising the right of the ownership. It is stated that the said Papamma sold the entire extent in-favour of her husband late. Gullappa under a registered sale deed dated 29.09.1969. It is stated that the said Papamma during her life has executed a Will bequeathing her 1/5th share in-favour of her grand daughter Smt. Lakshmi @ Neela. It is stated that Smt. Chennamma and her children have got 1/4th share each out of 1/5th share, Smt. Lakshmi has succeeded 13 L.A.C. No.195/2000 not only to an extent of 1/4th out of 1/5th share but also succeeded to an extent of 1/5th share of Papamma her paternal grand mother. The 2nd son Jayappa, 3rd son Venkatesh each have succeeded and are entitled to receive compensation of 1/5th shahre each out of total compensation amount awarded. Smt. Lakshmi and her children have succeeded and are entitled to receive 1/5th share out of total compensation amount awarded.
.6. It is stated that 2 nd son Gullappa by name Jayappa without disclosing or mentioning the names of all the LRs of deceased Gullappa has made a claim claiming the entire compensation amount awarded alleging that he is only LR of deceased Gullappa. The claim made by him is false, frivolous and vexatious. He has suppressed the names of all the LRs to defeat and to take away the right of other LRs of deceased Gullappa. Hence, prayed for apportionment of compensation amount.
.7. LR of claimant No.1 Jayappa has filed claim statement stating that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 14 L.A.C. No.195/2000 measuring 2 acres 8 guntas of Kothanuru village, purchased by his father on 29.09.1967. Subsequent to the purchase, he got changed all the revenue documents like pahani, mutation etc., and all the documents stood in the name of his father. It is stated that after the death of his father, he succeeded to his estate and he has been in possession and enjoyment of the said land and he has become the absolute owner of the said land. So, he is entitled for the compensation amount awarded in the above case as he is the legal heir of his father. Hence, prayed for apportionment of compensation amount.
.8. The claimant No.28 R. Lakshmi has filed claim statement stating that she purchased the site bearing No. 43 and 44 khatha No. 21/2 formed in Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 40 X 60 feet East to West 40 feet and North to South 60feet situated at Kothanuru village for a valuable sale consideration of Rs.1,32,000/- from one Gangappa through his General Power of Attorney holder H. Anjani on 26.06.1995. It is stated that she had been 15 L.A.C. No.195/2000 in possession and enjoyment of the said property and the khatha has been accepted by the authority concerned. It is stated that claimant No.30 has no right, title and interest over the land as already seized to be the owners. The respondent has acquired the said land for public purpose. It is stated that she is the only person entitled for the benefit of the said land. Hence, prayed for apportionment of compensation amount.
.9. The claimant No.29 Ganesha S/o Muniswamma has filed claim statement stating that he is the absolute owner of the land measuring 2 acres 8 guntas of Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village and the said property was acquired by his father Muniswamappa through registered Will dated 10.02.1986. All the revenue documents were standing in the name of his father. It is stated that his father died about 7 years ago. After his father death, he succeeded to his estate and he has become the absolute owner of the said property. It is stated that he being legal heir and sole successor of his father, he succeeded and entitled for 16 L.A.C. No.195/2000 the lands in question. Hence prayed for awarding the compensation amount.
.10. The claimant No.30 Gangappa has filed claim statement stating that he is the sole owner of the immovable property bearing Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village. It is stated that he purchased the said property through a registered sale deed dated 16.03.1971 from its original owners G. Munishamappa and Smt. Puttamma for valuable consideration amount. All the revenue documents stand in his name. It is stated that the respondent had already acquired the said property and he has not at all parted with the said property to any other person. He is alone entitled for compensation amount in-respect of the above said property to an extent of 2 acres 20 guntas. Hence, prayed for apportionment of compensation amount.
.11. The claimant No.31 Smt. Latha has filed claim statement stating that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 3 acres 17 guntas belonged to one Gangappa and he has formed the revenue sites over the said land 17 L.A.C. No.195/2000 and sold the site bearing No. 40, khatha No.70, assessment No.28/2, measuring 32 X 40 feet to her under a registered sale deed dated 31.05.1997 fr a valuable sale consideration. She being the absolute owner to an extent of 32 X 40 feet is entitled for the compensation amount.
.12. The claimants 33 to 43 have filed claim statement stating that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 measuring to an extent of 4 acres 24 guntas of Kothanuru village originally belonged to Gaddiga S/o Muniya. It is stated that there was partition between Gaddiga and his brother Yerappa and by virtue of the partition, the said Gaddiga inherited the property to an extent of 2 acres 24 guntas out of 4 acres 24 guntas and the other 2 acres fallen to the share of his brother Yerappa. It is stated that after the death of Gaddiga, his 4 daughters along with their children inherited the properties belonged to Gaddiga. It is stated that they are all legal heirs of late. Gaddiga and being class-I heirs are entitled to claim the compensation amount to 18 L.A.C. No.195/2000 be awarded by the Court and hence, this claim statement.
.13. The claimants 49 to 52 have filed claim statement stating that the property is an ancestral property originally belonged to one Muniya. The said Muniya had 5 sons namely (1) Gaddiga; (2) Kullappa; (3) Geddathimmappa; (4) Motappa and (5) Yerrappa. After the death of Muniya, the undivided property was standing in the name of Gaddiga who is the eldest son of Muniya. The property remained in the name of Gaddiga till today and partition has not taken place even after the death of Gaddiga until the acquisition made by B.D.A. It is stated that late. Gaddiga has got only one daughter by name Eramma, who died without any issues. After the death of Eramma as there was no successors to succeed the estate of Gaddiga, the other brothers jointly cultivating the total extent of 4 acres 20 guntas without any interference by anybody else. It is stated that in that juncture, the younger son of late. Muniya i.e., Yerrappa even though there was no 19 L.A.C. No.195/2000 partition fraudulently without knowledge of other brothers, without having any right, title and interest over the property has falsely executed a Will during the year 1947 in-favour of his only daughter Puttamma at the time of her marriage to one G. Muniswamappa S/o late. Gurrappa. It is stated that after the marriage G. Muniswamappa sold the property to one late. Gangappa during the year 1971 without the knowledge of legal heirs of Muniya Subsequent to that the fraudulent act of G. Muniswamappa only with an intention to make a lawful title filed a Civil suit seeking for permanent injunction and declaration in O.S.No. 521/1983 before the Civl Judge at Bengaluru, making claimants 1 to 4 as defendants to the said proceedings. The claimants appeared and challenged the validity of the suit by questioning the validity of the Will as well in the absence of the partition among the sons of late. Muniya. The Hon'ble Court after proceedings to the trial heard both the parties and passed a detailed judgment and decreed by dismissing the suit. It is stated that the 20 L.A.C. No.195/2000 B.D.A. acquired the property in question by issuing notice in the year 1994 to the name of Gaddiga, who is the khatha holder of the property and deposited the compensation amount also in the name of Gaddiga. The claimants 1 to 4 are the successors to succeed the estate of their ancestors and they are having absolute right over the property to claim the compensation amount which is deposited by B.D.A. Hence, prayed for apportionment of compensation amount.
.14. In order to prove their case, the claimant No33 Lakshmamma is examined as PW.1. claimant No.31 Smt. Latha is examined as PW.2. One Jayappa S/o late. Gullappa is examined as PW.3. LR of claimant No.1 Srinivas is examined as PW.4. The General Power of Attorney holder Ashit Rao is examined as PW.5. LR of claimant No.30 Gangaraju is examined as PW.6. Claimant No.49 V.M. Ramappa is examined as PW.7. The documents got marked as Ex.P.1 to P.37.
.15. Heard the arguments.
21
L.A.C. No.195/2000 .16. The following points that would arise for my consideration are:
(1) Which of the claimant are entitled for compensation amount?
(2) What order or award?
.17. My findings on the above points are:
Point No.1 : As per decision, Point No.2 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS .18. POINT No.1 : The claimant No.31 Smt. Latha has been examined as PW.2. She has stated that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 3 acres 17 guntas of Kothanuru village originally belonged to one Gangappa and he formed the revenue sites over the said land and sold the site bearing No.40, khatha No.798, assessment No.28/2 measuring 32 X 30 feet under a registered sale deed dated 31.05.1997. PW.2 has stated that original owner Gangappa has formed the revenue sites and sold the same to her and other persons. The said owner has made a false claim before 22 L.A.C. No.195/2000 the Hon'ble Court for compensation, but he is neither in possession of the same nor he retained any portion thereof and so he is not entitled for compensation of the amount in-respect of the said land. She has stated that she is the absolute owner of the site No.40, khatha No.798 and so she is entitled for compensation.
.19. To corroborate her contention, she has produced registered sale deed dated 31.05.1997 executed by H. Anjani the General Power of Attorney holder of Gangappa in her favour of as per Ex.P.9, wherein, property is bearing Sy.No. 21/2, property No.40, khatha No.798 situated at Kothanuru village measuring 32 X 30 feet consisting of vacant land and one sq. AC sheet roofed house. During cross- examination she denies that in the sale deed survey number has not been mentioned and so, she is not entitled for compensation.
.20. From Ex.P.9 it is seen that Gangappa had purchased the property on 23.03.1971 which has been registered in document No.5850/70-71. Ex.P.28 is the 23 L.A.C. No.195/2000 sale deed dated 16.03.1971, under which, Muniswamappa has sold Sy.No. 21/2 in-favour of Gangappa and the same has been registered in document No.5850/70-71. It could be held that site purchased by Smt. Latha is in Sy.No.21/2. As the land has been acquired, Smt. Latha is entitled for the compensation to an extent of 32 X 30 feet from the compensation deposited.
.21. S. Sadashiva Rao is examined as PW.5. He has stated that he is the General Power of Attorney holder of his son Ashith S. Rao. His son had purchased site No.21 formed in Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village under the registered sale deed dated 16.04.1997 and was put in possession. Ex.P.27 is the said sale deed. From the document, it is seen that H. Anjani, General Power of Attorney holder of Gangappa had executed sale deed on 16.04.1997 in-favour of Ashith S. Rao in- respect of property No.21 measuring 42 ½ X 30 feet. He approached the grama panchayath to get khatha in his favour. He was informed that B.D.A. has acquired the 24 L.A.C. No.195/2000 property for formation of layout. He sought for compensation equivalent to his area.
.22. During cross-examination he denies that survey number has not been mentioned in the sale deed. On perusal of the sale deed, it is seen that survey number has not been mentioned. He admits that he has not produced the plan. No suggestion has been put to PW.6 that site has been found in Sy.No. 21/2 and he purchased property No.21.
.23. On perusal of sale deed Ex.P.27 it is seen that the vendor Gangappa is the absolute owner of the property and he had acquired the property from Puttamma on 23.03.1971, registered document No.5850/70-71. From Ex.P.28, it is seen that document No.5850/70-71 is sale deed under whch Muniswamappa has sold 2 acres in Sy.No. 21/1 in- favour of Gangappa. So, it could be held that claimant Ashith S. Rao had purchased the site in Sy.No. 21/2 as the land has been acquired, is entitled for compensation to an extent of 42 ½ X 30 feet.25
L.A.C. No.195/2000 .24. The claimant No.33 Smt. Lakshmamma has been examined as PW.1 for herself and on behalf of claimants 33 to 43. She has stated that she has filed the affidavit on behalf of other claimants also. She has stated that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 measuring to an extent of 4 acres 24 guntas of Kothanuru village belongs to one Gaddiga who is grand father of her husband Munierappa. The Genealogical tree is as follows:
Gaddiga -Chinnakkamma
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Muniyamma 2. Nasamma 3. Sakamma 4. Papamma @ Nallakka @ Narasamma : : : :
1. Munierappa 1. Govinda Krishna (son) Muniyappa(late)
2. Jayamma 2. Marappa Smt. Aluvelamma Jayappa (son)
3. Hanumakka @ Venkatappa (Daughter) W/o Venkatesha (son) 4, Gowramma late. Rudrappa Govindaraju (son)
1. Munierappa (late)
a) Shekar
b) Lalita
c) Pushpa
d) Padma 26 L.A.C. No.195/2000 .25. PW.1 has stated that there was partition between late. Gaddiga and his brother Yerappa and by virtue of partition, Gaddiga inherited the property to an extent of 2 acres 24 guntas out of 4 acres 24 guntas and remaining extent of 2 acres fallen to the share of Yerrappa. The other 3 brothers had taken other properties as their shares. After the death of Gaddiga, his 4 daughters along with their children inherited the properties belonged to Gadida to an extent of 2 acres 24 guntas.
.26. PW.1 has stated that as the respondent has not issued any notice to them and they were not at all aware of the land being acquired by the respondent. She has stated that Gullappa the husband of Papamma who was aware of the proceedings had filed an application to claim compensation. She has stated that all the legal heirs of late. Gadida being Class I heirs are entitled to claim the compensation amount. 27
L.A.C. No.195/2000 .27. To corroborate her contention, she has produced Genealogical tree as per Ex.P.1. Ex.P.2 to 8 are the RTC Extracts. From the RTC Extracts as per Ex.P.8 and 2 it is seen that for the year 1969 to 76 name of Gaddiga S/o Muniya is mentioned in col. No.9 and in Col.No.10 it is mentioned as Pithrajita. Ex.P.3 is the RTC Extract from 1977 to 1984, in Col. No.9 name of Gaddiga S/o Muniya is mentioned and at Col. NO.10, it is mentioned as MR 5/81-82 measuring 2.08. In Col. NO.12(2) name of Gaddiga is mentioned. The Ex.P.4 is the RTC Extract for the year from 1985 to 89, wherein name of Gaddiga is mentioned in Col. No.9 and 12(2) to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas. Ex.P.5 is the RTC Extract for the year from 1989 to 91, name of Gullappa is mentioned to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas and name of Gangappa is mentioned in Col. No.9 in pursuance to MR No.12/92-93. Ex.P.6 is the RTC Extract for the year 1997 to 2002, the name of Gullappa is mentioned to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas, Gangappa to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas. Ex.P.7 is 28 L.A.C. No.195/2000 the RTC Extract for the year from 2007-08, names of Gangappa and Gullappa are mentioned to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas each.
.28. During cross-examination, PW.1 has stated that the claimant No.1 Gullappa is brother-in-law of her mother-in-law. She denied the suggestion that claimants 1 to 27 alone are entitled for compensation. She has stated that joint family members are not residing together and that they are residing separately. She admits that she has not produced any partition deed. The claimants 44 to 48 have suggested their case, but PW.1 has denied the same. She denied that all the revenue documents stand in the name of Gullappa and so, he is not entitled to receive the compensation.
.29. Jayappa S/o late. Gullappa has been examined as PW.3. He has stated that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 2 acres 8 guntas situated at Kothanuru village was purchased by his father namely Gullappa under the sale deed dated 29.09.1967. Ex.P.14 is the sale deed. From the document, it is seen 29 L.A.C. No.195/2000 that Papamma D/o Chinnamma had sold the property to Gullappa S/o late. Munierappa measuring 2 acres 8 guntas in Sy.No. 21/2. PW.3 has stated that subsequent to the purchase of schedule property, his father got changed all the revenue documents and name of his father stood in all the revenue documents. Subsequent to the death of his father, he being the absolute owner and successor of the said Gullappa became the absolute owner of the schedule property. He has stated that his father is the notified khatedar of the schedule property and after the death of his father, he succeeded to the estate of deceased. They have not alienated the schedule property to any body and he being the LR of deceased Gullappa, has handed over the possession of the schedule property to the respondent subsequent to the acquisition. So, he is entitled for compensation amount.
.30. To corroborate his contention, he has produced 3 pahanies as per Ex.P.11 to 13. Ex.P.10 is the mutation, which reveals that name of Gullappa has 30 L.A.C. No.195/2000 been mutated in pursuance to the sale made in his favour by Papamma. Ex.P.11 is the RTC Extract for the year 1984 to 1989 name of Gullappa S/o late. Munierappa is mentioned at Col. No.9 and 12(2), extent is mentioned as 2 acresd 8 guntas. Ex.P.12 is the RTC Extract for the year 1978 to 84, names of Gaddiga and Gullappa are mentioned at Col. No.9. Ex.P.13 is the RTC Extract for the year 2002-03, names of Gangappa and Gullappa mentioned in col. No.9 measuring 2 acres 8 guntas each and in Col. No.12(2) names of Gangappa and Gullappa are found.
.31. During cross-examination PW.3 admits that his father had 4 brothers. However, he denies that they have title in-respect of property. He admits that his father had 4 sons including himself and that his father has lost the original sale deed; that the property bearing Sy.No. 21/2 is ancestral property of his maternal grand father. It is elicited that his mother has 3 sisters and that his mother's name is Papamma. He denied that apart from his mother, his mother's sisters are also 31 L.A.C. No.195/2000 entitled to compensation; that his mother's sister Muniyamma has expired. He pleads ignorance that name of husband of Muniyamma is Motappa. He admits that Motappa has 3 daughters and a son by name Munierappa and after his death, his wife Lakshmamma was prosecuting the case. He denied that all the children of his grand father are entitled to the share. It is elicited that sister of his mother Narasamma has expired.
.32. LR of claimant No.1 Srinivas has been examined as PW.4. He has stated that his grand father Gullappa had died in the year 2000. The Genealogical tree of Gullappa is as follows:
Gullappa (Dead) Smt. Papamma (Dead)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muniyappa Jayappa Venkatesh Govindaraju
(Dead) (Dead)
Chennamma (wife) Lakshmi (wife)
Srinivas (Myself) Jyothi
Manjunath Sony
Lakshmi @ Neela Benaka
32
L.A.C. No.195/2000
.33. PW.4 has stated that the land bearing Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village measuring 4 acres 18 guntas and out of which, 2 acres 8 guntas originally belonged to Chinnamma, the mother of Papamma and mother-in- law of Gullappa. The said Chinnamma gifted 2 acres 8 guntas of land in-favour of her daughter Papamma under a registered Gift deed dated 21.12.1949 and on the date of registration of the gift deed the possession of the property was delivered to Papamma. The said Papamma was the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the land, she was exercising the right of ownership.
.34. On perusal of the document, it is seen that it is only Chinnamma had executed the document. It is stated that the said Papamma was the absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the said property and she sold entire extent in-favour of her husband Gullappa under a registered sale deed on 22.09.1969 and mutation was accepted in-favour of Gullappa and he was paying the revenue and was exercising the right 33 L.A.C. No.195/2000 of ownership. He has stated that Gullappa the husband of Papamma predeceased his wife. The first son of Gullappa also predeceased his parents. The said Gullappa died intestate leaving behind these claimants, his wife Papamma, 2nd son Jayappa and 3rd son Venkatesh. They all succeeded to the extent of 1/5th share, wife and children of Muniyappa succeeded to the extent of 1/5th share, Jayappa succeeded to the extent of 1/5th share, Venkatesh succeeded to the extent of 1/5th share, Govindaraju succeeded to the extent of 1/5th share to the estate of deceased Gullappa.
.35. He has stated that Smt. Papamma wife of Gullappa succeeded to the extent of 1/5th share to the estate of her deceased husband. The said Papamma during her life time has executed a Will bequeathing her 1/5th share in-favour of her grand daughter Smt. Lakshmi @ Neela. The said Lakshmi and her children have succeeded and they are entitled for 1/5th share out of the total compensation amount awarded. 34
L.A.C. No.195/2000 .36. He has stated that 2nd son of Gullappa by name Jayappa without disclosing the names of all the LRs of deceased Gullappa has made a claim claiming the entire compensation amount awarded and they are also entitled for compensation.
.37. To corroborate his contention, he has relied upon RTC Extract as per Ex.P.17. The said RTC Extract is for the year 2002-03, the name of Gangappa is mentioned to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas and name of Gullappa is mentioned to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas in col. No.9 and 12(2). Ex.P.18 is the Encumbrance certificate, which discloses that there is no encumbrance from 01.04.1990 to 31.03.2005 in- respect of 2 acres 8 guntas, bounded on East by land of Yerrappa, West by land of Ramaiah, North by land of Venkatarama and South by oni of Government. Ex.P.19 and 20 are the tax paid receipts for the year 1985 and 1975 receptively. Ex.P.21 and 22 are the tax paid receipts. Ex.P.23 and 24 are the tax paid receipts for the year 1955. Ex.P.25 is details of land and at Col. 35
L.A.C. No.195/2000 No.2 survey number is mentioned as 21/2 and 36/6B and the extent shown as 2 acres 8 guntas and 1 acre 35 guntas. Ex.P.26 is the death certificate of Papamma, which discloses that she died on 11.12.2007 and her husband name is mentioned as Gullappa. No document has been produced to how that Papamma had executed a Will in-respect of her 1/5th share in-respect of her grand daughter Lakshmi. PW.4 has failed to prove execution of Will by Papamma.
.38. During cross-examination he pleads ignorance as to whether acquired property is ancestral property of Giddathimma. He denies that claimants 33 to 43 are also entitled for compensation.
.39. Gangaraju is examined as PW.6. He is the legal representative of deceased claimant No.30 Gangappa. He has sworn the affidavit on behalf of other Lrs.
.40. PW.6 has stated that his father was absolute owner of property bearing Sy.No. 21/2 situated at Kothanuru village measuring 2 acres 20 guntas and he 36 L.A.C. No.195/2000 purchased the same under registered sale deed dated 16.03.1971 from Munishwamappa. Ex.P.28 is the sale deed dated 16.03.1971 executed by Muniswamappa in-
favour of Gangappa to an extent of 2 acres 20 guntas. Under the sale deed as per Ex.P.15 Puttamma had sold to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas in-favour of Muniswamapa, Muniswamappa could not execute the sale deed more than 2 acres 8 guntas in-favour of Gangappa. So, the extent of the land purchased by Gangappa is confined to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas only.
.41. PW.6 has stated that subsequent to the purchase, all the revenue documents such as RTC Extract and mutation are all standing in the name of his father. To corroborate his contention, he has produced the occupancy certificate and RTC Extract as per Ex.P.30. From the said document, it is seen that name of Gangappa has been mutated in pursuance to MR No.12/92-93 to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas and his name found in Col. No.9 and 12(2). Ex.P.31 and 32 are 37 L.A.C. No.195/2000 the Encumbrance certificates, which discloses that sale made by Munishamappa, Puttamma in-favour of Gangappa. Ex.P.33 is the mutation, which discloses that sale made by Puttamma in-favour of Munishamappa and as there was no objection from any one. Khatha has been changed to the name of Munishamappa.
.42. PW.6 has stated that subsequent to the death of his father, claimants 30(a) to (e) have succeeded to his estate. He has stated that in view of acquisition of land they are entitled for the compensation amount. Ex.P.29 is the Genealogical tree. During cross-examination he has stated that original sale deed was lost when their house collapsed and in this regard, he has not lodged the complaint. He pleads ignorance about Anjaneya. He has denied the suggestion that his father formed the sites and has sold the property.
.43. Claimant No.49 V.M. Ramappa is examined as PW.7 for himself and on behalf of claimants 50 to 52, 38 L.A.C. No.195/2000 who are his cousins' brother and sister. He has stated that Sy.No. 21/2 totally measuring 4 acres 20 guntas belongs to one late. Muniya. The said Muniya had 5 sons namely Gaddiga, Kullappa, Geddathimmappa, Motappa and Yerrappa. After the death of said Muniya, undivided properties has stood in the name of Gaddiga who is eldest son of Muniya. The property remains undivided until the death of Gaddiga. The property remained in the name of Gaddiga and till today the khatha of the said property stands in the name of Gaddiga. He had only one daughter namely Eramma, who died without any issues. After the death of Eramma as there was no successors to succeed the estate of Gaddiga, the brothers of Gaddiga namely Kullappa, Geddethimmappa, Motappa and Yerrappa started to cultivate the property without any partition. He has stated that the last son of Muniya namely Yerrappa without having any partition fraudulently without the knowledge of other brothers and without having any title and rights over the property has 39 L.A.C. No.195/2000 executed a Will during the year 1947 in-favour of their only daughter Puttamma at the time of her marriage to one G. Muniswamappa S/o late. Gurappa. He has stated that after the marriage G. Munishwamappa who is the husband of Puttamma sold the property to one late. Gangappa during the year 1971. Subsequently, the said Muniswamappa has filed a suit for permanent injunction against these impleading applicants before the City Civil Judge, Bengaluru in O.S.No. 521/1983 for permanent injunction and for declaration. They challenged the validity of the suit by questioning the validity of the Will in the absence of the partition among the brothers of Yerrappa. The said suit was dismissed. He has stated that the property in question admittedly ancestral property. The B.D.A. acquired the property in question by issuing the notice in the year 1994 in the name of Gaddiga S/o late. Muniya and deposited the compensation amount in the name of Gaddiga. He has stated that his father Motappa and children of Kullappa, 40 L.A.C. No.195/2000 Geddathimmappa, Yerrappa have right over the said deposited amount.
.44. To corroborate their contention, they have produced judgment and decree in O.S.No. 521/1983 as per Ex.P.34 and 35. From the judgment, it is seen that G. Muniswamy S/o Gurappa had filed the suit against M. Ramakrishnappa S/o late. Muniswamappa, Nagamma, Rajanna, Ramappa and Lakshmaiah for permanent injunction. The suit has been dismissed. The Court has observed that name of Gaddiga S/o Muniya still appears in the column of khatedar and nature of right in the said land Sy.No. 21/2 has been shown as ancestral. No entries are made either in Col. No.10 or 11 as to the partition alleged by the plaintiff among Yerrappa and his brothers. These documents further show that the case of the plaintiff as to his exclusive possession with the suit property is totally unfounded. Looked from this angle plaintiff must fail in getting his suit decreed.
41
L.A.C. No.195/2000 .45. Ex.P.36 is the Genealogical tree of Gurumuniyappa. Ex.P.37 is the RTC Extract for the year from 1974-75 to 1978-79. Name of Gaddiga S/o Muniya is shown in Col. No.9 and at Col. No.10 it is mentioned as Pitrajita.
.46. From the evidence of claimants 33 to 43 and 49 to 52, it is clear that originally Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 4 acres 24 guntas belonged to one Muniya and he had 5 sons namely Gaddiga, Kullappa, Geddathimmappa, Motappa and Yerappa. The said Yerrappa and his wife had executed a Will on 20.10.1949 in-favour of their daughter Puttamma and the plaintiff is in O.S.No. 521/1983 to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas. The Court in O.S.No. 521/1983 has held that Yerrappa could not have bequeathed joint family properties and plaintiff cannot derive any interest under the alleged Will. The Court has also observed at para No.9 page No.10 that plaintiff Muniswamappa had executed the sale deed in the year 1971 in-favour of relative of his second wife. Ex.P.28 is the sale deed 42 L.A.C. No.195/2000 dated 16.03.1971 executed by Munierappa and his wife Puttamma in-favour of Gangappa in-respect of Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 2 acres 20 guntas of Kothanuru village.
.47. Muniswamy had filed suit against children of Muniswamappa and Motappa. They were aware of the sale made by Muniswamy in-favour of Gangappa. They did not challenge the sale deed. Even though Gangappa did not derive title under the sale deed by remaining in possession for more than 12 years he had perfected his title to the property. The said Gangappa had formed sites which is evident from Ex.P.27 and Ex.P.8.
.48. From Tippanni attached to the award, it is seen that the Government regularized unauthorized construction in-respect of 20 sites to an extent of 39 guntas and reduced the said 39 guntas from 4 acres 24 guntas confirmed acquisition only in-respect of 3 acres 25 guntas, out of which 8 guntas is a kharab. The reference is sent only in-respect of 3 acres 17 guntas.
.49. From Tippani as already stated that in- respect of 39 guntas site are formed by Gangappa. 43
L.A.C. No.195/2000 Through his General Power of Attorney, he had sold 32 X 30 feet in-favour of claimant No.31 Smt. Latha and site measuring 42 ½ X 30 feet in-favour of claimant Ashith S. Rao. After dedcuting total sales from 2 acres 8 guntas purchased by Gangappa remaining land would be 1 acre 7 guntas.
.50. Gangappa has died during pendency of the case and his LRs have come on record. In view of the earlier discussion, the said Gangappa had perfected his title to the property and he is entitled for compensation in-respect of 1 acre 7 guntas.
.51. From the RTC Extract produced it is seen that Sy.No. 21/2 measuring 4 acres 16 guntas is the ancestral property and it was standing in the name of Gaddiga S/o late. Muniya. Chennamma W/o Gaddiga executed gift deed on 22.12.1949 in-favour of her daughter Papamma to an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas. On 29.09.1967 Papamma executed the sale deed in- favour of her husband Gullappa as per Ex.P.15. The name of Gullappa has been mutated in the revenue 44 L.A.C. No.195/2000 records in MR No. 8/81-82. Neither the gift deed nor the sale deed has been questioned by any members. No suit for partition was filed by any one till the date of preliminary notification or till date of acquisition. The evidence discloses that daughters of Gaddiga are not residing together. Gullappa by remaining in possession for more than 12 years has perfected his title to the property. Gullappa has expired on 12.05.2000, his son Jayappa (claimant No.1(a) is entitled to 1/4th share, claimants 45 to 48 are together entitled to 1/4th share, Venkatesh S/o late. Gullappa is entitled to 1/4th share, Lakshmi W/o late. Govindaraju, Jyothi, Sony, Benaka the children of Govindaraju are together entitled to 1/4th share in 2 acres 8 guntas. Hence, I answer point No.1 accordingly.
.52. Point No.2: In view of my finding on point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The reference made by the respondents under Sections 30 and 31 of 45 L.A.C. No.195/2000 the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is hereby partly allowed.
LRs of claimant No.30 are entitled to the compensation to an extent of 1 acre 7 guntas out of 3 acres 17 guntas bearing Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka.
Claimant No.31 - Smt.Latha is entitled to the compensation to an extent of 32 X 30 feet in Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka.
Claimant No.32 - Ashith S. Rao is entitled to the compensation to an extent of 42 ½ X 30 feet in Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka.
Claimant No.1(a) Jayappa S/o late.
Gullappa is entitled to 1/4th share, claimants 45 to 48 are together entitled to 1/4th share, Venkatesh S/o late. Gullappa is entitled to 1/4th share, Lakshmi W/o late. Govindaraju and Jyothi, Sony, Benaka the children of Govindaraju are together entitled to 1/4th share in 2 acres 8 guntas 46 L.A.C. No.195/2000 in Sy.No. 21/2 of Kothanuru village, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka.
LRs of claimant No.30, claimant No.31 Smt. Latha, claimant No.32 Ashith S. Rao, claimant No.1(a) Jayappa, claimants 45 to 48, Venkatesh, Lakshmi, Jyothi, Sony, Benaka 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.
The reference made by the respondents in-respect of remaining claimants is hereby rejected.
Draw award accordingly.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, revised by me and after corrections, pronounced in open Court on this the 14th day of March 2022.) (Sheila B.M.) II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge, Bangalore 47 L.A.C. No.195/2000 ANNEXURE
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR CLAIMANTS:
PW.1 : Lakshmamma PW.2 : Latha PW.3 : Jayappa PW.4 : Srinivas PW.5 : S. Sadashiva Rao PW.6 : Gangaraju PW.7 : V.M. Ramappa
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE CLAIMANTS:
Ex.P.1 Genealogical tree Ex.P.2 to 8 RTC Extracts from 1969 to 2008 Ex.P.9 Registered Sale deed dated 31.05.1997 Ex.P.10 Mutation
Ex.P.11 to 13 RTC Extracts ( 3 in numbers) EX.P.14 Certified copy of registered sale deed Ex.P.15 Certified copy of sale deed dated 29.09.1967 Ex.P.16 Original gift deed dated 21.12.1949 Ex.P.17 RTC Extract Ex.P.18 Encumbrance certificate dated 23.06.2005 Ex.P.19 to 24 Tax paid receipts (6 in numbers) Ex.P.25 Final report issued by Tahsildar Ex.P.26 Death certificate Ex.P.27 Registered sale deed dated 16.04.1997 Ex.P.28 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 16.03.1981 Ex.P.29 Genealogical tree 48 L.A.C. No.195/2000 Ex.P.30 Occupancy certificate and RTC Ex.P.31 & 32 Encumbrance certificates (2 in numbers) Ex.P.33 Mutation register extract Ex.P.34 & 35 Judgment and decree in O.S.No. 521/1983 dated 21.03.1995 Ex.P.36 Genealogical tree Ex.P.37 Occupancy certificate and RTC
3. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENT: Nil
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENT: Nil (Sheila B.M.), II Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge Bangalore.
49 L.A.C. No.195/2000