Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

The Spl Lao vs Thappanna on 26 June, 2008

 'Y f{s;sy.p,L}"MA14AN*1'HAN, AGA)

   

 " 'l"!~lAPPANNA

IN TKE HIGH could' or KARRATAKA AT BANGALORE
mvrzzn rats was 26th may or Jam 2008
'um HOWBLE nmatrsnm V.GOPAI.A      

H.F.A.No.49éi9'ij;{);-'KI4FEiC)€ ei\uu;%a§:1-*;a.$n3Aon.24s1o4
h!.F.A.No.$G«1£qf64{L1i(;}__ ¢,Iw.% m{F£§;CROB.249/04
M.F.A.No.5Q4-_§_104(LACi~£2,lfi;"l&'A.CROB.250I04
m.r.A.r: .5q47;mgmc;%%c/w.kmrA.cno3.251/04
M«F.A.aNo-504~fi!94{LAC3%¢/w, l!FA.CROB.252/04
H.F.A.P§o."5049f€)§${IA&_G;__¢'I_w. nmx.c:aon.253/04
H.F.A.N6.V5050I04£MG9._§iw. nm;.cnon.27o/04
m   
_1;%§fi»-----~--~L 'A W ' E§;!:{.~;° . 

3 ' -.f:'1~.-L31: s;u,.*--:_,A0
v'aswsswA'R;mAH (.'.l:1N'l"RE
3RD FL<;»m_%2,j'..--1>0D1UM BLOCK

« BANGALORE-1

. . . APPELLANI'

S)' () MUNIKADLRAPPA
R] O HANDARAHALLI
CHENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI

 



T' g._ '(1s;,» Sri P 'i€'.Rl.'35fli'¢f'§§PPA. ADV )

DEVANAHALLI TALUK
BANGALORE D181'

2 THE CHIEF (,'.£)i'4S'l'RUCl'l0N ENGlNEi:}R(RFi})
DRDO, BANGALORE, CAMBRIDGE ROA9
OPP. CMS OFFICE, AGARAM P'€)ST
BANGALORE

 :<1:;s12uNs2i;;;u%1'(.3)'--_ 1'  'V

(By Sri P KRISHNAPPA pore R1, SR1 N.D!::1v\/AREAS, $1§:Aijv{ '.'-my 

SR1 H.C.SUNI)ARESH FOR R2 )

MFA s«'1u::u U/S. 54(1):»: LA AC1', Ac;-Ai1*+a.s'1"1*}i:+;.m:)<,;§J§§iN*1"Ann "

AWARD m'.19.4.03 PASSED IN LAC fio.'55/97 ;:3~1s:J'mE'jz='1L1:": OF
THE PRL. cmi, JUDGE {s12,13N), VABANGALQRE RGRAL ms'r.,
BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLGWYMG REFERENCE PETITION
FOR ENHANCED COMPENSATIUN.' *    

IR' MFLCROB 150.24-8' 

nmwmx: 

1 'ma:-u--'0:*+su 4. V    
S/0MuN1i{AnIRAz~'?2=.A »- "
80 YRS  "   
R /A i-§1AI~H:>RAH}'aL_LY VILLAGE
-" -  CH£+;NNARAYAPATNfi----§--}OBLI
 t>E:vANAH]ALmf_ TALUK
 BANi;H§L£)R!:i'=§§U'RAL 9131'

. CRO ' '=-(}BJ}:}(.I'l'()R

;.
3. "

 . f1*:_£:s; SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION <m~'1ci::1<

" VISWESWARAIAH CENTRE
.5 III FLOCJR mowm BLOCK
BANGALORE 550 em.

2 THE} CHIEF' (3()NS'l'RUCl'lO¥~l ENGINEER (RFEJ)

C"""'f\"'~"""'fl_'

 



DRDO BANGALORE
CAMBRIDGE ROAD
OPP CMS CJFFICE
AGARAM P08'? '
BANGALORE

 mssmn     .

(By SRlN.1)h)\?ADAS,SR.ADV.AND SR1H.C.SUNL).fii<Ei£§}_£bF'i$R--_ 1'  2

R2, SR1 L.UMAKANTI~IAN, AGA FOR R1  .

Mmxzkos FILED we 41 R  ._o1«' cm: A(3¢'iIi'§S'1f mks:
JUDGMENT AND AWARD D'I'.19.4.03 --.mssE1) LN 'LAC: Mafia;/97
on THE FILE (BF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE' (SR.DN},,_ BANGALORE
RURAL r)1s'r., BANGALORE, PARTLY  ALLOWvIN(}7 THE
REFERENCE PETITION FOR 'H,NHANCED{:o.Mi?I3NsATI0N AND
SEEKING :~«'um'1~u.«;1«: :s;rmANcr;M:::N':' 0rfj';1L;vuM;.émsA*:'1oN.

In mm.so4s(o4:     % If:

_B_:I%_T;V!l%,;;§.1i_; V V
1 'nus sm, LA{~i1) Atzmg i:~jV1'1q§ji«e, (.;:-1«';«':<;1::te
VISVESWARKAIAH CENTRE 
3RD FLOOR, PGDIUM BLOCK
BANGEQCRE 566 Q01 .. APPELLANT
(B¥' sié1'L.gjmfiiégésmfiagm, Aéfi)

I): 

  ' - KENCHAN s.~:~  LINGAPPA

 'R/AT HANDARHALLI
~ ~ .1'   _ _C-HENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI
 " 'g;>;::wx:\;AHA1.:.1*1'ALu;<.
 BAN(;';ALORE um'

.   CHIEF' (l()NS'i'RUCi'l()N ENGINEER (sew)

~._If)'RDO, BANGALORE, CAMBRIDGE ROAD

  _ 3399 CMS OFFICE, AGARAM POST

' BANGALORE  RE-SI-'ONDEN'I'(S)

 



 2 ';l'§ii§§--.f3!~iii:§Ff"C(};§i$'i'RUCl'l0N ENGINEER men

  7ij';g§"S;-i;N.L>t:;vAuAs, SR.Ai.)V. AND H 0 SUNDARESH CGSC ma
 R3, S-R2 L.UMAKAN'I'HAN FOR R1 )

a"~v. ""4M':r~A.cxo3 FiLi::D we 41 R 22 or' CPL'. AGAJNSI' *1"m:;

4

(By SR3 NJJEEVADAS, SRJKDV. AND SR1 i-i.C.SUNl.)ARESH F0
R2, SR1 RKRISHNAPPA FOR R1) 

MFA Fll.i:}D U/S. 54(1)ox~' LA AC1', AGAINST 'rut; JuoGMa:N':?_A_N'Q
AWARD D'I'.19.4.o3 PASSED IN LAC NO. 6?'/9'?' on T;--;1a:'5.."1'1....E up
THE PR1... CIVIL JUDGE {SR.DN), BANGALORE Rr}RAL._I3-1S::;;: 
BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENr:;EV.VPEfrITI0N"  
FOR ENHANCED COMPENSATION.  :  "  

IN MFA..CROB.249 ( O4:
BETWEEN:

1 KENCHONU

78 y1<s,s/0 LINGAPPA: _ 
R] 0 HANDRAHALLY v?1.gLA.GE«'_
CHAN NARAYAPATNA NOBLE' %  
DEVANAHALLY,BANGA14QRE_  .V  :,.

    _ CROSS-OBJECTOR

(By 3:11 smt} M§"§{j<iwS:iN.«{3éPA.:';a.:§v) V
Am):  ' V 3 VT  %

1 '1'k~lE SPECIAL LANL)' Acqulsmmst o1«*m:u;:<
 V. « wsv7e,fsw;1RA1AH'--vcz3mRs
 , " -11; ¥4'LO(3R, FDDIUM BLOCK
 *BANGt'sLORE_  ._

DRDO B£.N€3§ALORE
-- CAIVIBRE-DGE ROAD, 013? cms omca
Aaeanag 9031*, BANGALORE

 Rl:)SPONL)i$N'l'(S)

 JiI{)GMENT AND AWARD D'F.19.4.03 PASSED IN LAC No.67/9:7
(-....['"'\u..-v---~.______,..--,

 



' V ' '  7 V . V BAN mgpo mg Diifil'

_  ¢ i£_aKSHMAl ViMA w/0 BASAPPA

.  1_-4A " CHIEF (3()NS'l'RUC1'l(}N ENGlNl:'.l:)R (Rl«'3.))

ON THE FILE OF Tkiizi} PRL. CIVIL JUDGE. (SKDN), BANGALORE
RURAL DIS'T., BANGALQRE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
REFERENCE F'ETi'I'IC)N FOR ENHANCED COMPENSATION ARE
SEEKING FU R'l'l-iitllwt ENHAN(.1l:*JMEN'l' OP' (3(JMi't:'.NSA'l'lON.  

IR' M.F.A.KO.504-6104:

BETWEEE:

1 'ms: 391. LAND A(;t(_)UiSi'l'i()N 0wx<::s'1e  '_ 
VISVESWARAIAH CENTRE   . 
3121:) FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK
BANGALORE 560 001

 A£Pr§1;L..=._§N'i* V.
(By Sri L..UMAKAN'l'HAN, ADDL.--- govgaerc 1~.a1;::N*;»'_ ADVOCA'1':£

R/'AT HAN.DARAHALLl.,_ '  " 
CHENNARAYAPATNA HQ3L;__  
ub:vANAHALL1_*r'ALu':; ' 
aAm;A;,{)m«; um'  

1 P:LLoNA.:éPAT'$/m.3oi§jjAt§(%ijHA:,Aj3vA

2  MUNl'¥AM2MA we KENCHAPPA
«,2; AT HANDARAEJALLI
(:'HENrmRm{APATN,A HOBIJ
1)EVAN_AHA1§L.l 'rA'L'L:1<

" "   --R/ATVTHANBARAHALLI
 ¢ GHENN'ARAYAPATNA HOBLK
-» , V ":)1svAMHALL: 'ranux
 _ 'BAN{_}AL()Ri:3 msr

  DRDO, BANGALORE, CAMBRIDGE ROAD
OFF' CMS OFFICE, AGARAM POST
BANGALORE

 



 RbJSPOND££N'l'(S)

(By Sui] Smt : P KRISHNAPPA FOR R1-3, SR1 N.Di£}VAl,)AS,
SR.ADV.AND SR1 H.C.SUN{)ARESH ADVS. FOR R4 }

MFA z«m:;u u/s. 54(1)o:«' LA Am', AGAINST 'rm; .:unGM,2:~:a.'1f-;A.._1'v-:3. ,_ " 

AWARD m'.19.4.03 PASSED IN LAC NO. 53197 on THE:-.F11gE.T ~
THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN), BANGALORE R'§J__R"AL ms%r.,  _
BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFEREN-CE' " T?E"!'I'i'IC}£5I  '

FOR ENHANCEED COMPENSATION.

IN l!.F.A.CR£3B.250[ 04-:

BETWEEN:

1 PILLONAPPA
510 1)0m)A PA'l'HALAl.+'P
so YEARS 
R/O HANDARAHALLI,  
CHENNARAYAPATIIA Hozf:_'L1 ' 

DEVANA1jIA§--.«IJ  ~  
tsanuawier; R13 22,51, unszj 

:2 MUNIYAMMA 4- _ 
w 10 Kis;NCH'D_NAPPA_
as YEARS   
_ R/O ¥is'i%.N{)r"sRAHAi;1_.I, ,
 'CHEN-NARAYAPATNA'H0BL1
EVDEV'A_N1=.HALLI4 'i'ALUK
BAf€{}ALU'i%5ERU1_{A.L 0131*

, LAKSHMAMM;AI__ 
' w/0 EASAPFA
 4 69 YEARS 
" 'A »  -Rm HAN DARAHALLI,
 4 ("JHENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI
-» _ - " QEVAMHALLI TALUK
 *.BAN {3rAL()RE RURAL. DIST

 CROSS-QBd}:)UI'ORS

 SfiP KRISHNAPPA , Auv )

 



ARI):

1 THE SPECIAL LAND A{.1(_)_UlSl'l'l0N O}*'P'l(3iiiR
VISWESWARAIAH CENTRE,

III FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK,
BAN(}ALORE--1

2 THE CHIEF (JONS'l'RU(3'i'l(JN EN(}lNb}i:;R(R}*'l})"  ' V
DRDO, BANGALORE   « 
CAMBRIDGE ROAD  
OPP CMS OFFICE
AGARAM POST
BANGALORE

 ",1.-.-- Iei«;SP0iS£L3191~e?;'(s)

(By Sri SR1 N.DE\/ADAS, sR.A15v'.' AfiL1_;%-371  it :§u:~:,1)A1«e2::s1-s
cesc FOR R2 SR} L.UvMAKAh§'{'HAH',vAC}A,'"FQR._'i2.1)

M}-'A.(3RO};3 m.:1,2:>:3._'t:/0'*I::,«:~.1  22""'o»:r-" cm AGAiNS'l' Tme;
JUDGMENT Ami) AWARDAV m219.4,o3 EPASSED IN LAC No.58/97
on THE FILE "€)F*THE 95%., EEIVVH5 JUDGE (SRJZJN), BANGALGRE
RURAL ::>1s'r.;g "BANGAL-.{;}.RE-,.___ '=ii*Ar2'rLY ALLOWING THE
REFERENCE PETETIGN F'0R..ENfiANcED CQMPENSAHON AND
SEEKING !*'U!€l'Hl1)i<"i51Si1~iAR()t%;MEN'l' 01¢ compm SATION.

   .....

'1*H.E §s 1>:, A§cQu1s1'i'10N O1~'1+'l(31::R _v1svE:--swARAIAH CENTRE _ 3RD FLCICHE', PODIUM BLOCK t§ANfiALORE 550 001 APPi:ILLAN'l' .. A4 , L' ' V :,f.'U1:.:AxAN*1'HAN, ADDL. (i{)VERNMi33N'l' AUVOCA'l'h'. ) k '1" POOJAPPA as/0 DODDA MUNIGA :2; AT HANEDARAHALLI c~5--""'-""'"""' " "'i'm.«; SPECIAL LAND A(.3QUiSi'l'l()N OFFICER CHENNARAYAPA'l'NA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE. DIST 2 *rma calm' (3{)NS'l'RU(3'l"i0N h'.NGlNl:}i:lR (RFD) DRDO, BANGALORE, CAMBRIDGE ROAD OPP CMS OFFICE, AGARAM P051' BANGALORE r¢ri$P0~uvsN*1'<s: Q 7 (By Sri/ Smt: P KRJSHNAPPA ma m.,_;sr<1 N;.t_j1::vAL>.A.::§; AND SR1 I-I.C.SUNDARESH FOR R2 R A r ' MFA m1.1:;u U/S. 54(1)o1«' LA AC1', AGA.!..N_'SZf *m:«; dU'L3(3rMI:$V§3&'1' AND AWARD m'.19.4.03 PASSED iN~~.LAC'NQ.43f98~-ON THE FILE 0? 'THE PR1... CIVIL JUDGE (sR;'m~I).,. 8A2mAL:3RE RURAL DIS'I'., BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING VTHE :RE«FE'Rfi1'.-NEE PETITION FOR ENHANCED COMP}3NSATI.ffi*?.- BETWEEN: V % % 1 POOJAPPA A _ .

s/0 Di:-,'!)DAM"UNlGA"

as YE:!'gRS* " _ 'R10'-:~JAN.£3a.A1%AHALLi 'SHLLAGE (2Hi§N_NA.RAYAPATNA HOBL:

'mEVANAHALLI%' TALUK B}§N(}ALOR§§;.RU;;RAL um' . . . CROSS-UBJECIDR ' Sm: : Pkkasunappa ) WSWESWARAIAH CENTRE, HI FLGOR, PGDIUM BLOCK, BANGALORE~--1 ¢____Sm"""\..~?' 1-! THE} CHIEF C()NS'l'Kl}C'l'lUN lL'N(.}]NEER(Rl~*'D) DRDO, BANGALORE CAMBRIDGE ROAD OPP OMS OFFICE AGARAM POST BANGALORE (By Sri sax N.DEVADAS. SR.Al.)V. AND s1%n.__H'--{;A'suN'uvAR1«;:;H " ~. case FOR R2 SR1 L.UMAKANTH3N,_AGA,A.;?oRVR13: "
M1«'A.(:RoB ;«'u,n:;u we 41 R 22 "-m' AGA1N§s*1' THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD D'F.;--],9.4.03"'PASSED IN LAC No.43/93 cm THE FiLE C)? THE PRL. '¢::mL .f;uI;><:;x:.._(~:~;_m;s:~r}, BANGALORE RURAL 13:91:, BANGAL<:>RE,_r 'PARTLY "ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION' FOR g:;vHANCE,D"Co'M1éF:;NsAT1oN Arm SEEKING FL} R'i'HE.K k;,rm.4i\Nr.::ia::v1i:::~zi:' ;;1»:fcg)r»a1~*,r;::s3 SA'l'I()N. BETWEEN: V' 1 THE SPL LAM) AC(,}U1ASi'i'.i._(3N 0FFiCER VISVE--SWARAiAH' CENTRE 3RI)4s&fL00R, PODEIJVM BLOCK ' HA1?-GALeRE..56o 001"

. V. --. APPELLANT (By sfi.L;'JiJ,.%aA1{§ixNi1'2-$334, ADDL. Gov1::1eNMn:;N'r }wvocA'1't;) '>.i€AMA.NdlNAPPA sgu MUNIYAPPA ' . Ri/A*r~HANDARAHALLz " CRENNARAYAPATNA HDBLI

-D-EVANAHALLI BANGALORE ms?

THE) c:m1:;1«' <..:uNs*mucn<,m ENGiNh'.l:JR (sew) DRUG, BANGALORE, CAMBRIDGE ROAD OPP CMS OFFICE, AGARAM POST f...S_\""*-V.-/'--"

_ '».{gsy Sri] zsnfi .; £a.;{kisHNAPPA ) ' 1 K V' 'im; SPECIAL LAN!) A(3(,)_UiSl'l'lUN ow1cr;R BANGALORE ... mssmu m::N1'(s3.
(By 312;? KRISHNAPPA you R1 SR} N.L)islVAL)AS, SR.Ak)V. _ SR1!-I.C.SUNDARESH FOR R2 ) L' 5 . » MFA m1.r;u Li/S. 54(1)m~*1.A AC1', AGAINSI' 'mm au1,)c;~:saE2~f;'*1' Am)-« AWARD m'.19.4.o3 PASSED IN LAC N0._44;98 on 'I'H3.§:; F1'Lx3:j~Voi=',_V THE PRL. CiViL JUDGE {SR.DN), BA:~¢GAL0i2.x:"._RuR5L_s)1s'1f.,« BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE 7-.REf+'EFéEN»f:E _PE'I'§..'l'1Q'£§-E]:
FOR ENHANCED COMPENSATIGN. _ ' " ' IN MFA.CROB.25g[04»:
BETWEEN:
1 RAMANJANAPPA .

s/0 MUNIYAPPA__ V saws % = R[A HA1qI2RAHALi;*{__v1LLA§;I5',' CHANNARAYAEATNA 5931.1 DEVANAHALLY ":'z.=ai-.uK,_ " . BAN GALEJRE RU--RAi.{l)ISIfA ~ , :2 MUNIYAPPAV , 3/ 0 (§}AN{.}APPA A. """

Rm HANDf?.AHALLY VILLAGE t::HAN.NARAY;uéATNA HOBL! E¥El1?;iN£&§i1'{,LLY" TALUK BAN{}Ai.0Ki:§'j_R';J RAL DIST CROSS-OtsdECi'()RS »i 1' VISWESWARAIAH CENTRE 111 FLOOR PODIUM BLOCK BAN GALORE 560 um.
(__$""f\-------*\/ A Q. P LAKSHMAIAH

2 THE CHIEF' CONS'FRUCk'l()N ENGINEER (RFD) DRDO BANGALORE CAMBRXDGE ROAD OPP OMS OFFICE AGARAM 1-'0S'l' BANGALORE mssmm _ (By Sri SR1 N.Di:)VADAS, SR.AD\!. AND aft. s'L)N:)A§~:1sst§_"::

FOR R2 SR: L.UMAKAN'I'I~iAN AGA FORE? A. * MFA.CR(}B Fil.J.*}i_) U/{.) 41 R 22 UPC VAGi_Alfi':§!.T_'£'HE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.19.4.03°=.P}§SSED"IN N'Q.44/98 ON THE FILE OF' THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE {SRDN}-,. _BANC3'rAL{3RE RURAL DIS'I'., BANGALORE}, I-'ARTLY --_ALLOW'I'N'G Ti-IE REFERENCE PETITION FORV E_§rHA%;'_\ICED "COMPENSATION AND SEEKING FUR'i'HER h}NHANCEMb}_N'§"i)i3' (3QM'i9ENSA'l'lON. IR M.F.A.Ko.304-9L0}! ::ir :
BETWEEN:
1 'mt; SPL. m.Nu%A<;Quis1'1*;<}N o1«';«':(:1~_~:1< 'VISVESWARAIAH r::VE';N'1";2E' 3RD F:f_LOG.R, Po's:2I_iJM BLOCK = .'3AN.:;;;LQRE.%.56o 002 -------- --~ * ... APPELLANT (syszi 3;UMA':¢,§we?1'HAm, ADDL. G{}VJ:}RNMl£N'l' ADV()(.'.A'l'i£) 4: -1 ' NARASIMHAIAH T R12'-H HARAPANAHALLI ~-LCHENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI .m3vANAr--IAL;,1 TALUK " BANGALORE DIST R] AT HARAPENAHALLI CHENNARAYAPATNA I-{DELI _,...S'K"\'"\...

DEVAN AHALLI TALU K BAN GALEJRE DIST BYAYAMMA DEAD BY HER LR IS MUNYYAPPA S] O. LATE BYAMMA,R]A'l' HARAPANAHALLI CHENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI i3EVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DIST MUNIYAPPA R] AT HAi<f£PANAHAbLl CHENNARAYAPATNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TALUK BANGALORE DIST 'rm.«; CHIEF C()NS'l'RUC!,--'10N s;\::_;:L.:vf1~;.e:1~z__(:<x«'1)) DRDO, BANGALORE, c;a.Ma1re:r:2<:~;3 ;'2<:>_;=-,1)'-, op? Ch/{S OFFICE, AGARAM ' A BANGALORE % , V (By srip 1u<1SLg:NA;>a%A"';«éogé'--33 524 SR! N.1)EVA1)AS, SRADV. AND SR1 u.c.suNpA'R$sH yea R5 ) MFA }«'lLl:',D ws. 5iZ{1)0.}{' LA A(,"ii~'," AGAINST 'l'Hi:}. .JU1)GMl£N'l'ANl_) AWARI) DT.;19.4,03 PASSED EN LAC No.45/93 ON THE FILE 0? 'I'ij.£i)'~PRL...i€:1I\?IL JU:}GJg;v...gKc;,;e.DN), BANGALORE RURAL DIST., BANGALORE, "pAm*1,Y ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PE'!'ITI()N ma'-gNHAN.c::3:m';0M;?ENsATI0N. * M.F.xéRo§.'£$3 nAaAsi§aHA1AH so. R1.-LLQNAPPA fif.-R/"A HANDRAHALLY CHENNARATYAPATNA HOBLE ~ QEVANAHALLI 'FALUK \. BAN(:'rAL()RE D131' P LAKSHMAIAH SID PILLONAPPA €30 YRS

-*"% 1 'l'HE SPL LAND ACCJUISITION {Jl4'§*'iCER WSVESWARAIAH CENTRE 3RD FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK BANGALORE 560 001 .J.»}LPPii.LLAN'I" .1: '-

(By Sri L.UMAKAN'l'HAN, ADDL. Gov::::<N1Q12;N*1.S_ ADV().t'Q»§\ 'i"k§' V AND:

1 K PKEMA w /0 N 1«usMpAj~£N_5;' R AHANDAAHALLI ' 0 ENNARAYAF'AT'NA HOBLI v DEVANAFJALLI 2 'rm; cum» C(.)1'£:§3'i_?1«2U2(3'i'14_()'1"¥f~£+;Ni.}iN£§;ts}R (1-am) memo, B.An:c}AL()R*i&,_ CAMBRmG«E...RUAD 0?? CMS i)FF"i{';E, AGAT-?;A'is5_ Pam BANGALORE' ' - ...RESP{)NDENT(S) (By Sri P KRlSHNA}'}~'A 1«*cm"z<1»--,,$_;<1 N.Dh'.VAi,)AS, smmv. AND SR1H.C.SUNDARES'HF'C>R R2*. ) MFA '$411 544 1)o£§' AGAINSI' 'l'Hb} JUDGMb}N'l' AND AWARD E*T.}9.-4,.{}34 PASSED IN LAC No.45/93 on THE FILE 012 THE 'PEEL. "c1xaz11.*.m:>'L*;E (SRJJN), BANGALORE RURAL DISI1, BANGA1-ORE, 'm'm5LY;ALL0w1NG THE REFERENCE PETITIGN 'FfQR ENHANCED CQMPENSATION.

% _ '§l_l'!;§?..A.¢.'!1§£3!BV';$£;_'2'hV()4(0-4:

H" F' " * i'«iR§:MA 1310 N KBMPANNA %"»AQED YRS QR/A HANDARAHALLI ~ .. .. CHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI DEVANAHALLI TQ BAN GALORE» RURAL D131' W (Hy Srif Smt ; 9 KRISHNAPPA ) AND:
1 THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUlSl'lf!{_)N OF A (BER VISWESWARAIAH CENTRE ' ' .

III FLOOR, PODIUM BLOCK BAN Ci~ALORE« 1 2 *m1:: CHIEF C.0NS'l'RUCl"i(}NAi*}_N(_?~E1P§¥E"i$§€ {Rif'D) DRDO, BANGALORE = CAMBRIDGE ROAD -

OPRCMS 0FF}t::.E=:.._V ' AGARAM BANGALORE: " ' ' ' .,.';;"RE'$éQNuEN'1'(s) (By Sri N.uei":(AuAS;'S:<;A:L3y;'Aim H C SUNDARESH CGSC you R2, SR1 L.UMAKAN'I'I--iAN,=:f&f,}A«.lf'0.R,R1 ) Ml+'A.CR()B _ FILED. Ugo, 41$: 22 01» cm AGAINST THE JUDGMEN'? Arm AWARD m'.19.4.03 PASSED IN LAC No.45/98 QNTHE §%iLE,..oF.__THE PRL-.-~CiVlL JUDGE (SRJJN), BANGALORE RURA»L~,_ DIS'i'§, _ "BANGALORE, PARFLY ALLOWING THE REFERE'-NVCE '-PE'1f1T1e--N FOR ENHANCED COMPENSATION AND SEEKHQG-5'__i*'Ui€l§Hj§}i€:E.?i HANCEMl:'}N'l' OF C-()MPENSA'l'l()N. "RESERVED .. "FOR JUDGMENT AND comma; on " PRQNQUTNCEMENT THIS DAY, ARAIJIEQGARAI, J. DELIVERED c *£.'}1i£.j}»'()LL;i)AW1NG:

'l'HE!$E ,APP 3}ALS A/W.CR(.)l-3S HAVING 1-mun HEAR!) AND FOR JUDGHERT These seven appeals and cerresponding cross-o bjections t0 the respective appeals filed by the respective respondent-
-
£6 claimants herein have arisen from the common judwxeifiaiizl the respective awards dated 19.4.2003 mssed byqfiley ' Prl.Civil Judge, (Sr.Dn.) Bangalore Rural' K 0' hereinafter referred te as the "Refetenee totally 37 Land Acquisition of V 1997; 43 to 51 and 53 of 19$~,=..e_; goeti 'éu1d''}24 & 25 of 2002. The respondenee appeals are respectively the cleireefits 68 of 199? and 43 to 4e of 199810 " ' " V
2. 'l't§e' cross---objee1:ors herein are aggrievefii. judgment and respective awards. 'l'-i1.eLASelZ1.AAO,. respondent in all the said 37 ee.eeee""'lV)efore ' the Reference Court, has the respective awards in all said "-;:~1o\veve1?=,Afor the sake of convenience the present _. , .0 '5/;,'(A»§1;f(j"Vj"I}AA{;§,f}p('J¢'*?Lv1':'.3. and correepending cross-objections are taken fee and the rest of the appeals, along with the V _ emss-ebjeetions, will be disposed of in the light 0 4"' « . ef judgment.
3. Tile Reference Court has awarded in favour of the respective claimants in the said land acquisition caees the ,sw\__..b 1'?

compensation by determining the market value at uniform rate of Rs.3,30_.0{}O/- per acre along * consequential statutory benefits K 2 Re.E>0,()(}0/- per acre which was the respect of all the lands under aet1u.te'itio11.. V' vlf of " L' the appellant Spl.LA() that" the tialflue by the Reference Court at the scale, the case of respective is that the same is be further enhanced.

4. of Sri Umakanthan, the teamed ACSA for the appellant, Sri P.l<.risl111.aj.ppt_1, for respondent-1 Spi.i.AO tlefideocate, for respondent-2 beneficiary and Development Orgnisatrion. T' ;*eferredT.* Al to as the "DRDO" for short). H their argumente, we find that the findings the Reference Court as to the validity of the Vt references made by the Spl.LAU in all the said eases, the description and extent of the lands held by the reepective claimants therein, the entitlement of the claimants to all the consequential statutory benefits on the market (.._$"?'\..---\,..., 18 value as part of the compensation, the different datestof various notifications and also the date on V 3 possession of the lands under acquisition was Spi.LA() from the respective ciaimantsgare' 7.301;' The dispute is only in respect of _the.a11d "

potentialities which the lands underaeqmssuogzaa a;1o"the determanaeon of their marketz\_Ia1t_ie"'--as':'ooh"ttge date bf their acquisition. H S. The cross»o;'bjeeters éthe "corree;r_xonding appeals have claimed aaxke: vaiue at the rate of Rs.4,00,(}()(i;'gV above the market value awarded by 1. the Reference Subsequent to the filing of .c'ross'Fo€bjeetione, tfieiffiave filed their applications under ordefe saith Section 151 and Order 41 Rule 3 of to the prayer column in the " Lcrossiobjeetions claiming enhanced market value =. I"ate'é of Rs.4,00,000/-- per acre over and above »v.,--i§)0{)/- awarded by the Reference Court as against ciaim of Rs. 1,130,000] - over and above the one aa}a1'ded by the Reference Court aiong with the consequential statutory mnefits thereon. These amendment applications 0 £9 are seriously opposed by the appellant -- Spl.LAO in all appeals.
6. in View of the submissions of the learned foe ' M appellant, the learned Sr. Counsel for learned counsel for the cross objectors oto' that weuld arise for our coxisideraliogizl 1 the corresponding cross~objectle1}s I
1. Whether the applicatiozlisjl the claimants seeking column therein market value at the rate of their initial claim Lilli: "c1'oss~objections for _ of the lands under .A addition to Rs. 3,3o,o0o/- per :e;e:_*ex the Spl.L.A.O. deserve to be whether the market value determined by the ~. Refereiice Court in the impugned judgnent . the respective awards at RSI3,3U,UUUlW Vt V. acre in respect of lands under acquisition in all the said cases reqlzims to be reduced as contended by the appellant -- Spl.LAO or it requires to be further enhanced as eentended by the respective cross-objector claimants '9 '_§m7"\------av
3. What order ?
Our findings on the above points 3195 as« tmdert ' I Point No.1: In the afirn;1ativeL'~.. A. Point No.2: " The marketirailue deterfifinégd Iiicfcronco i,nza,_(icq_7uate, reqtmfes to' be A fujrthor enhanced to Rs. 7 ia'i:hs- p€;rj.aC~sw§ of-.thc aoqtfirtd lands "_§vi1;h an fi;h€'--f_CO!1S6q1I6I1t'lal é _ :Vstat1I:toI'y' tliczjcizin" 
Point    M 

for the :;:,  " 

REASONS
in all the 3'? land acqtlisition cases
- the Roferenco Court, wherein the impugned common the respective awards came to be passed, the h finder acquisition are all situate at Handrail! village, .:_fC3h,o:1naraynpatna Hebli, Devanahalli 'raluka. of Bangalore S iiural District. All the lands came to be acquired under the some preliminary notification No. LAQ(2)SR-46/92-93 dated aw 24 value at higher rate than the {me claimed by him before Reference Court?" was considered by the ' detail and, after elaborately discus:5'i:Eigf" 't1T1i':'.",: pmteeis Sections 1 land 23 of the Land Aequieitto:1tAet,'E\eutie1u1 f'c}:'j the Karnataka Town and SODA = . L' of the Constitution of _jud§fi1ent.e:§ of High Courts and the Hoxfble Ape§'c$ that even if the claim of the is;'_Afo1_r the real and true market to true and real market valee ae be denied by any authority ortceilzft '"1t'is observed at paras 20, 21, 22 and 'of the as under:
_VVL'I"3e1:ie§g2bt);e_,.'1'heieefore there is statutory on the part of either Deputy to Assistant commissioner of the . 'Rgmmé Division or Reference Court to ' : detfefmme the correct market value ef the V' lands on the msis of the value of the lands situated in the locality. if, the owners are entitled for more compensation amount than the claim made by thezm in their claim petition in respect of their acquired lands cannot be put againet them. at the time of C""'S'~'-"L.--.r of the lands of the used ti/see.AII(3) of the L.A Act as word occurred in the 'provisions of the Act are H. 2 A' ' with a definite avowed purpose V iiobjeet to be achieved by the Legislature, o,.VtVti;hhe:refore the same caxmot be ignored at the 25 determination of market value. in ether words, even if the claim of the owner is less amount than the real and true market ' value the owners of the acquired ht entitled to the true and real 1f:iai'ket,_V'alue _ the .sC<IlU3I' 'ed lands as entitlement of either by the above Authefifies or It; an argument as Vttfespondefztsvt counsel that the for more eo1npe_r1eat:'ton"" 1 have claimed accepted by us, it wou1§i"riota.Voiifly of just and to be awarded by theabove Court by re---determinig*g the and pay the same" to been basis of true market' sag;-.1; the object of the time of interpretation ef the statutory provisions.
23
therefore, of the View that, in the present case, the Division Bench as well as the learned Single Judge should have allowed the appefiantsg to pay up the deficit Court~foe and M awanded to them c:ompe_11sa1_:ion_-"ét"" V' , the higher rate or rates ::dete1'1:eine£i' by them." _ (himphasis s§;p;;1:ed)'eo : A Para.22. 'l'he__ .obse:metione_.L' of.' the Court extracted 'ere to by this court in the case _o_1V"T' Jfigcéyuisition officer vs, mmpa mm 2343) in which s€i1i1ii;a,1'ie1;f;e1§(i;_;ier;t'---'efiplications filed by the; was allowed by this " decision of the Apex Gaziabad Development A.-gmgmy V%".Anoop Singh as ant. reported in _' 1004 and also another decision _ of Court reported in AIR 2002 94 (Ram Slnfi as out. Vs. State of U.P3V &§rhex'ei1a this Court following the above A ' " has held that the amendment applications fiied by the owner cannot be rejected merely because he has restricted his claim before the Reference Court and this Court at the time of filing Appeal, if he is entitled to get more compensation than what he has originally claimed either before the Sp-l.L.A.0 or Reference ("'5-."v*'\a4#"'"\l 33 learned ceunsei fer the cross~abje:ctor claimants smmgly urged that the Reference UGUI't based on the evidence fin record, both era} and dacumentary, produced "

ciaimants, has rightly mmrdm its findings in T judgment that the lands under acqm1isitic§ifit1::'ti;e§§g: _ also the lands situate in the neighbgalfmgé ti:rei';r=§ '% V' acquired under diflerent z1otification's""VL'ciV::fiIéI;g 1992 to 1994 ix} respect :413c::§:t"£<:2t was determined by the respecfive them lands as the though according to ag-icu.t::m~a1 dry lands had similar &dvanQ§g:=.§§ and and therefore, these in these appeals.

the lmmed counsel for the that though the Reference Court jzeziéi»-v'««.__tiaaAt tfagt' acquired lands had :1on-agrictzmzrai it has cammittcd serious error in refusirig tn ftfze relevant sale deeds whereunder the lands situate vtiilagcs were mid far higher price than b£s;3,£){},(}{}0/- per acre, tmiy on the gonad that the claimants have ciafimeci befere: the Spi.L.A{} and aiso before the €___g'_""""\----~'l~ 34 Refererace Court, the market value of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs.4,0U,0{){)/- per acre and P.W.1_. of the claimants in these cases, who has on behalf of himseif and at} other the Claimants are entitled to erihargceél 't:o1n1§cris;€i?,idit_' of 1<s.5,oo,ooo/-to 6,O0,{)(}0/-pe;"*a§:re.2"v.'V: Q

15. P.W. 1, has categoricalfi ejfidence that the iands of ,Handralti""--';ii}lage,f:«,' ohagniaraypama hobli of Devanahalli talukag which" the preliminary notification . in an these cases, the lands situate at Kattugoiiahalli hobli in "1iobti }':1SaI1'v§;a1.ore South Taluk acquired under issued during the years 1992 to 1994 fof of DRUG, and also the lands situate at t Agahara villages of Bangalore South W H K were acquired about more than 9 years prior to ' % Lheeooqiijisifion of acquired lands in these cases i.e., under the Vt it notification dated 13.9.84 for the benefit of '4 Kainataka lndustriai Areas Development Board ("K1ADB"' for short) ali comprised a big block of lands and the compensation awarded in respect of the lands acquired for r______§"""*-----""'"'\......._a- 36 romained unchallenged inasmuch as the respondeni}$.__'§3V§§fti%i~¢g%"'~~ the Reference Court have not produced any evideuoo * this evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2. Besides 'i:Ac;m;1a%ope;§¢e§a from a perusal of b}x.P1, the map of S,o1;T.§1* that, as stated by P.Ws.1 and 2 village of Devanahalli lauds in these cases situate, is quite village and also Kattugoflaflafi the lands pertaining to ' purposes during the years map of Devenahalli taluka, also 'L _17. ' 'tugs', oral evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, 81_"1(V3'.A itho Ex.P1, the map of Bangalore South Z;g'_i'aluk, ' of Devanahalli taluk and an other v?1je1Ve:v'ant marked for the claimants in these cases, has rightiy recorded its findings that the me': (:1 in these cases and also lands situate in the V . ::i£§i[ghbouI'ing villages which came to be acquired under notifications for simiiar purposes during the years 1984 and 1991 to 1994, had the same advantages and non» agricultural potentiaiitics and they were all better suited for ¢..s"*er\»-x---\ viz., Sringaripura in respect whereof the market value $430,000/-- per acre was awarded.

19. The Reference Court; has observed at K of its impugned judgment that produced certified copies of A deeds,T.»'ti1.€':F helpful to the claimants as P.\Af:1:vV:._"hi:nseif.V_ for d enhancement of compensaigien pf Rafi to 6 iakhs per acre. While observing refused to consider l:.'x.P'20,i_" the sale deed whemundef Estate and Investments Pvt.L.td. i.e., about more than two yeare prit}r.,tg in these cases, one acre aiepfice of lakhs. On the same ground, the refused to consider all other sale deeds T' Villblfldifig }:::_;;i-"'.3,Adthe sale deed dated 8.11.95, wherelmder 2 d H of land bearing survey No.16? [old survey Bemmanahalli village, hiidaraili hobli, Bangalore VT taluk, was sold by its owner Muraibasappa in favour of 9191'/s.Unicorn Agroteeh Ltd. for a total consideration of Rs.2(3,40_.S00/-.

20. While ageeing with the View taken by the fiéthel' Division Bench of this Ceurt, of which veeu was he in M.1r.A.No.22:s7/03 (LAC) and ether oonnectee u the corresponding cross-objections ta) hthafi claimant in a land acquisition case just and reasonable cempexlsafiefs» fair market value even if the the ceviiijiensafion claimed by him in his Reference Court or in his we are of the opinion that__the not justified in holding 'that since the cases claimed market vaiue age lewerfete entitled to the market value at a same.

common judgment dated 30.11.2002 96 and six other connected L A Cases .1 'hie sefpra, based on which the Reference Court herein market value of the lands acquired in these cases av'~._at'"the"rate of Rs.3,30,00{)/----per acre was challenged by the and also respect3v' e claimants therein before this Court; in M.F.A.No.2237/03 and other connected appeals and corresponding cross-ebjeetiens. The Division Bench of this ,,-.$"'V"""-"'o..r-

4%) Court, cf which VGGJ was a Member, by its common judgment dated 15.11.2007, passed in the said appeah cerresponding cross~objeetions, enhanced the market * the lands acquired in the said cases " V acre, as determined by the Reference lakhs per acre with all the We have observed supra the}: these cases were comparable With in the said cases in respect whe:ecf- > jcdglnetut dated 30.11.2002, gmcm ed 11 Addmity Civii Judge (OCH challenged in the said appeals objections (i.e._. M.F.A.Nos. the said Division Bench ef this V'feliowi11g the said judgment in the said 'wv.iéii5¥3'"-als, ha.ve.to'ho:d that the claimants in an these cases ' 'éit%£A"eV1:ii;itled tgowflhe same enhanced market value at the rate of per acre with all consequential statutcry A % f$e£icfitsT§the1*eon.

Sri. Umakanthan, the learned Aeaand Sri. N. fievadas, the learned Sr. Counsel appearing respectively for the apmllant and 211*' respor1dent--bencficiary have not been '.....S"'""""--aw' 42 objectors shall make the necessary ., the prayer column cf the respective objections

(ii) The present appeals i.e.,bc.M.b'.P;;Nee..494§) to 5050 of 2004, filed Spl.L2_\:0,e dismissed and tl1c¥;:4_"I'x«'11<'A.;_'?g','l'i;\:$:tvJV;:. ._lf4\cs,248 1:9 253 and 270 of 200-1,_filed are hereby es? iiidiceted above with um who are claimants in

1..AC':9ese. and 43 to 46 of 1993 V' market value at the rate of acre with all consequential as awarded by the Reference the common judwent dated 19.04.2003 ll " 4_p.alse.ed by the learned Prl.<.}ivil .Judge(Sr.l.)n.), V' 'Bangalore Rural District, lrlangalore in LAC Nos.e6f97 and 36 other ccnnected cases less the amount of compensation which they have already received. The respective awards in all the said cases shall be modified acccrdingy. The deficit c________"c"~%""g./---v Sgsj court fee shall be deposited by the respective cross» crabjectepclaimants within eight weeks from ~ date of drawing of the modified awards. % objectors are also entitled to get costs. 3 ' be paid on the enhanced "i é' a «V