Bangalore District Court
) Sri. Rajanna vs ) The Addl.Land Acquisition Officer on 4 August, 2021
1
L.A.C. No.50/2010
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (C.C.H. No.17)
Dated this the 4 th day of August, 2021.
PRESENT:
Smt. Sheila B.M, M.Com.,LLM.
II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.
: LAND ACQUISITION CASE NO.50/2010 :
CLAIMANTS:
1) Sri. Rajanna
S/o Rudrappa,
Chikkanahalli village,
Ramasandra Dhakhale,
Bengaluru South Taluka
2) S. Pasha
S/o Babajohn
Ramasandra
Kengeri Hobli, Sulikere post.
3) S. Renukappa
S/o Siddappa
Channa Basaveshwara Nilaya,
Chandramouleshwara Nilaya
Kyatsandra,
Tumkur.
4)Smt. Meenakshi
W/o Ramegowda,
Chandrapura Tandaga post,
Turuvekere Taluk
Tumkur District.
5) Smt. Renuka
W/o Mallaradhya N.C.
4th main road,
Siddarameshwara Extension
Tumkur.
2
L.A.C. No.50/2010
6) J. Varadaiah
S/o late. Javarappa,
No.66, Sulikere post,
Ramasandra village,
Kengeri Hobli,
Chikkanahalli (near Doddabasti)
Bengaluru South Taluka.
7)Shivanandappa
S/o Veerappa,
Kottigere post and Hobli,
Kunigal Taluk,
Tumkur Road.
8) Smt. Lalitha
W/o T.P. Narasimhamurthy,
2nd Cross, Gokul Extension,
Tumkur.
9) K. Badrinarayana
S/o Krishnashetty,
Shankar Talkies road,
Madhurgiri.
10) K.G. Vinay
S/o Y.V. Jagadish,
near Sumathi school,
Kyatsandra,
Tumkur.
11) K.G. Sridhar,
S/o K. Garudachar,
16th cross, Someshwara Puram,
Tumkur.
12) G.S. Sumangala
W/o T.V. Jagadish Babu,
No.12, Siddarameshwara Extension,
Tumkur.
13) V.C. Vijayakumari,
W/o Kumar,
No.B-29, 1093 BDA flat,
Astin Town, 2nd stage,
Neelasandra,
Bengaluru -47.
3
L.A.C. No.50/2010
14) R. Siddappa,
S/o Revanna,
No.199, 3rd cross,
Chandramouleshwara Extension,
Kyatsandra,
Tumkur - 572 104.
15) Mangala
D/o N.G. Paramesh,
No.253, 7th cross,
Chandramouleshwara Extension,
Kyatsandra,
Tumkur - 572 104.
16) K.R. Saraladevi,
W/o K.S. Nagaraju,
No.46, 9th main road,
Pipeline, Kalappa Block,
Srinagar,
Bengaluru -560 050.
17) Leelavathi,
W/o K.S. Shivakumar,
No.46, 9th main road,
Pipeline, Kalappa Block,
Srinagar,
Bengaluru -560 050.
18) K.M. Rajendran,
General Power of Attorney holder
in-favour of Rajanna.
19) Prema
No.362, 3rd cross, 1st main,
Shruti nilaya,
Sri Krishna nagara,
Bandihalli,
Tumkur (HMT),
Kyatsandra post,
Tumkur.
20) C. Venkatesh,
Behind Hudugara Model school,
Sarjapura,
Bengaluru -560 125.
4
L.A.C. No.50/2010
21) Indira Padmanabhaiah,
357, 1st main, 7th Block,
Banashankari 3rd stage,
Bengaluru -560 085.
22) Ranajith Bhaskar,
No.757, 1st main, 7th Block,
Banashankar 3rd stage,
Bengaluru.
23) B. Bhagya,
Infront of Railway station,
Shanthi nagara,
Tumkur.
24) Pranesh N.J.
253, 7th cross, Jayamangali road,
Chandramouleshwara Extension,
Kyatsandra,
Tumkur.
25) Varamarthana,
W/o K.R. Keshavaiah,
Madhugiri-572 132.
26) Rajeswari Bai,
No.25, L.R. Bande,
Kaveri Bhavana, KHB,
Main road,
Bengaluru -52.
27) K. Bhaskar,
No.22, E cross, JMJ Villa,
Sultan palya,
Bengaluru.
28) Ramarathna
W/o K.R. Keshavaiah,
55 years,
K. Shanthakumar,
No.170/1, Out House, R.V. road,
Bengaluru -560 004.
(Sri.DMG, Advocate for C-1)
(Sri.TMN, Advocate for C-2)
5
L.A.C. No.50/2010
(Sri.BGA, Advocate for C-3 to 7,
9, 12 to 15, 28)
(Sri.HVM, Advocate for C-8)
(Sri.GST, Advocate for C-11)
(Sri.HMM, Advocate for C-20)
(C-10, 16 to 19, 21 to 27 - Absent)
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENTS:
1) The Addl.Land Acquisition Officer,
B.D.A. Bengaluru.
2) The Commissioner, B.D.A., Bengaluru.
(By Sri. MG, Advocate)
: JUDGMENT :
The respondent No.1/SLAO, Bangalore Development Authority, Bangalore has made this reference under Sections 30 and 31(2) of L.A. Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as 'L.A. Act' for short) for apportionment of compensation amount.
.2. The respondent No.1 has acquired the land bearing Sy.No. 35/2C measuring 1 acre 4 guntas situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, 6 L.A.C. No.50/2010 Bengaluru South Taluka. It was acquired for the purpose of further extension of Sir M Vishweshwaraiah Nagara layout. Respondent No.1 has passed the award for a sum of Rs.6,71,430/-. The land owners have not received the compensation amount. Hence, the respondent No.1 has referred the case before this court and deposited the compensation amount.
.3. After receipt of reference, this court issued notice to both parties. In pursuance of notice, the claimants 1 to 9, 11 to 15, 20 and 28 have entered appearance through their counsels. The claimants 10, 16 to 19, 21 to 27 have remained absent. This court deposited the award amount in the bank as fixed deposit.
.4. Claimant No.2 - S. Pasha has filed claim statement, stating that the land in Sy.No. 35/2C measuring 1 acre 4 guntas, out of which, 4 guntas of land has been purchased by him from claimant No.1 Rajanna in the year 1995 and the same is made much earlier to the notification for acquisition of the said land. 7
L.A.C. No.50/2010 It is stated that BDA issued preliminary notification on 14.12.2001 for acquisition of the land measuring 4 guntas standing in his name and issued final notification on 31.10.2002 for formation of residential layout. It is stated that award has been passed on 02.12.2002 and compensation fixed at Rs.6,71,413/- for the said 1 acre 4 guntas and the same has been intimated by the respondent Authority to the land owners to take compensation as per their share. He could not collect the said amount within the prescribed period. Then the respondents have deposited the same before the Court.
.5. Claimant No.2 has stated that out of 4 guntas of land, he has executed sale deed in-favour of one Smt. N. Rajeswari Bai and one K. Bhaskar before issuing notification for acquisition. 2 guntas of land compensation should have to be paid to the said persons and he has to be paid 2 guntas of land compensation. He is entitled for interest at 9% to 15% from the date of award till date of receipt of the said 8 L.A.C. No.50/2010 amount as per Section 34 of L.A. Act. Hence, he prayed for releasing the compensation amount.
.6. Claimant No.4 - Meenakshi has filed claim statement, stating that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing property No.19, khatha No.9, formed out of Sy.No.35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by property No.10, West by Road, North by property No.18 and South by property No.20. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 21.05.1998 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been transferred to her name. She has been paying taxes.
.7. Claimant No.5 - Renuka has filed claim statement, stating that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property 9 L.A.C. No.50/2010 bearing property No.12, khatha No.35/2C, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by road, West by property No.17, North by property No.13 and South by property No.11. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 04.11.1999 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been transferred to her name.
.8. Claimant No.9 - K. Badrinarayana has filed claim statement, stating that he was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing property No.8, khatha No.9, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 30 X 40 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by road, West by property No.21, North by property No.9 and South by property No.4. The same has been acquired through 10 L.A.C. No.50/2010 sale deed dated 21.05.1998 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been transferred to his name. He has been paying taxes regularly to the concerned authority.
.9. Claimant No.12 - G.S. Sumangala has filed claim statement, stating that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing House list No.6, khatha No.35/2C, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by private property, West by road, North by property No.5 and South by property No.7. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 14.10.1999 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records 11 L.A.C. No.50/2010 have been transferred to her name. She has been paying taxes regularly to the concerned authority.
.10. Claimant No.14 - R. Siddaiah has filed claim statement, stating that he was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing House list No.21, khatha No.35/29, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by property no.8, West by road, North by property No.20 and South by property No.7. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 21.05.1998 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been transferred to his name. He has been paying taxes regularly to the concerned authority.
.11. Claimant No.15 - Mangala has filed claim statement, stating that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property 12 L.A.C. No.50/2010 bearing House list No.11, khatha No.35/2C, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by road, West by property No.18, North by property No.12 and South by property No.10. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 27.03.1999 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been transferred to her name. She has been paying taxes regularly to the concerned authority.
.12. Claimant No.24 - N.G. Paramesh has filed claim statement, stating that he was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing House list No.1, khatha No.35/2, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by private property, West by road, North by property No.2 and 13 L.A.C. No.50/2010 South by property No.1. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 02.04.1998 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been transferred to his name. He has been paying taxes regularly to the concerned authority.
.13. Claimant No.28 - Ramarathna has filed claim statement, stating that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing No.9, khatha No.9, formed out of Sy.No. 35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon bounded on East by road, West by property No.20, North by property No.10 and South by property No.8. The same has been acquired through sale deed dated 21.05.1998 executed by original owner Rajanna through his P.A. holder K.M. Rajendran for valuable consideration. Immediately after the purchase the khatha and other revenue records have been 14 L.A.C. No.50/2010 transferred to her name. She has been paying taxes regularly to the concerned authority.
.14. Claimants 4, 5, 9, 12, 14, 15, 24 and 28 have further stated that during pendency of the acquisition proceedings, the respondents have published a scheme for revenue site holders promising that they will allot alternative sites to them at the then prevailing rate in the same layout and asked the revenue site holders to apply for the sites in the prescribed format and within stipulated time. The claimants have applied for the alternative sites. After long time the respondents have conducted a spot mahazar regarding possession of the claimants over their respective revenue sites and verified the documents and taken possession. It is stated that after satisfying with regard to the ownership and possession of claimants, the respondents have recently allotted alternative sites in their new layout at the cost of claimants. The respondent-LAO without referring to the ownership and possession of the claimants in-respect of 15 L.A.C. No.50/2010 their sites had passed the award dated 28.11.2002. But no award notice were served on the claimants. Later- on, they came to know about award and had requested the LAO to pay the compensation amount. The LAO did not pay the award amount to the claimants. On enquiry the claimants came to know that the LAO did not pay the award amount to the claimants and have deposited the amount before the Court and sent reference to the Court under Sections 30 and 31 of L.A. Act, for apportionment. The claimants are entitled for interest on the award amount @ 9% and 15% from the date of award till the date of deposit the amount in the Court. Hence, claimants have prayed for apportionment of compensation in their names to the extent of 40 X 30 feet each with interest @ 9% and 15% on the award amount from the date of taking possession.
.15. The respondents have not filed objections to the claim statements filed by the above claimants.
.16. In order to prove their case, the claimants 2, 4, 5, 12, 14 and 15 have examined as Pws.1, 6, 3, 4, 5 16 L.A.C. No.50/2010 and 2 respectively and Documents got marked as Ex.P.1 to 9, 34 to 38, 18 to 21, 25 to 28, 29 to 33, 12 to 17 respectively. The respondents have not adduced oral evidence.
.17. Heard the arguments.
.18. The following points that would arise for my consideration are:
1) Whether the Claimant No.2 - S. Pasha proves that he is the owner of the acquired land measuring 2 guntas and he is entitled to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land deposited in this reference?
2. Whether the Claimant No.4 -
Meenakshi proves that she is the owner of the acquired land measuring 40 X 30 feet and she is entitled to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land deposited in this reference?
3. Whether the Claimant No.5 - Renuka proves that she is the owner of the acquired land measuring 40 X 30 feet and she is entitled to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land deposited in this reference?
4. Whether the Claimant No.12 - G.S. Sumangala proves that she is the owner 17 L.A.C. No.50/2010 of the acquired land measuring 40 X 30 feet and she is entitled to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land deposited in this reference?
5. Whether the Claimant No.14 - R. Siddaiah proves that he is the owner of the acquired land measuring 40 X 30 feet and he is entitled to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land deposited in this reference?
6. Whether the Claimant No.15 -
Mangala proves that she is the owner of the acquired land measuring 40 X 30 feet and she is entitled to receive the compensation amount awarded to the acquired land deposited in this reference?
7. Whether claimants 1, 3, 6 to 11, 13, 16 to 28 are entitled to receive the compensation amount deposited in this case in-respect of 1 acre 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C of Ramasandra village?
8. What order or award?
.19. My findings on the above points 1 to 7 are answered in the affirmative, point No.8 is answered in the negative and point No.9 as per final order, for the following:
18
L.A.C. No.50/2010 REASONS .20. POINT No.1 to 7 : These points are inter- connected. For avoiding repetition of discussion, I have taken up these points together for consideration. .21. As per the records, the respondent No.1 has acquired the land bearing Sy.No. 35/2C measuring 1 acre 4 guntas situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South taluk. It was acquired for the purpose of Sir M. Vishweshwaraiah nagara layout. After passing the award, there was a dispute for disbursement of compensation amount, the respondent No.1 has deposited the award amount of Rs.6,71,413/- which is kept in F.D. in Karnataka Bank Limited, City Civil Court, Bengaluru. .22. PW.1 Pasha has stated that he was the absolute owner of the land measuring 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka. Ex.P.1 is the sale deed executed by Rajanna in-favour of this claimant to the extent of 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C. Ex.P.2 is the 19 L.A.C. No.50/2010 encumbrance certificate, which discloses that Rajanna sold 4 guntas of land in Sy.No. 35/2C to this claimant. Ex.P.3 and 4 are encumbrance certificates. Ex.P.5 is the RTC extract in-respect of Sy.No. 35/2C of Ramasandra village, wherein, name of claimant No.2 is mentioned at column No.9 and 12(2) to the extent of 4 guntas. Ex.P.6 is the mutation extract, which discloses that name of claimant No.2 has been mutated as per registration No.7200/95-96 dated 15.09.1995. Ex.P.7 and 8 are the tax paid receipts.
Ex.P.9 is the genealogical tree. The documents produced by the claimant No.2 discloses that he was the owner, in possession and enjoyment of 4 guntas of land in Sy.No. 35/2C.
.23. PW.1 has stated that the B.D.A. has acquired the said land and fixed the compensation of Rs.6,71,413/- in-respect of 1 acre 4 guntas. The respondent No.1 has intimated him about the award. But he has not received the award amount within the 20 L.A.C. No.50/2010 prescribed period and so the respondent No.1 deposited the same in the Court.
.24. PW.1 has stated that out of 4 guntas of land he had executed registered sale deed in-favour of N. Rajeswari bai on 02.03.2000 in-respect of site measuring 30 X 40 as per Ex.P.23 and have executed registered sale deed in-favour of one Bhaskar in- respect of site measuring 30 X 40 feet as per Ex.P.24 before issuing notification. He has stated that he is entitled to receive the compensation in-respect of remaining 2 guntas of land along with 9% to 15% interest from the date of award till today. .25. During the cross-examination PW.1 has stated that there is no documents to show as to what extent of land he has sold out of 4 guntas of land. But PW.1 admits that he has not produced any documents to show remaining extent of land after selling 2 sites. However, from Ex.P.23 and 24, it is seen that claimant No.2 has sold 1200 sq. feet each in-favour of Rajeshwari Bai and Bhaskar i.e., in all he has sold 21 L.A.C. No.50/2010 2400 sq. feet. PW.1 had purchased 4 guntas of land and if it is converted into sq. feet it would be 4356 sq. feet. After deducting 2,400 sq. feet, which PW.1 has sold the remaining extent of land would be 2156 sq. feet. PW.1 has proved that he is the owner of the land measuring 2156 sq. feet in Sy.No. 35/2C. So he is entitled for compensation to the extent of 2156 sq. feet. So I am of the considered view that claimant No.2 is entitled for compensation to the extent of 2156 sq. feet out of deposited amount by the respondent No.1.
.26. PW.6 Parameshwarappa - General Power of Attorney holder of claimant No.4 - Meenakshi has stated that she is the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing No.19, khatha No.9, formed out of Sy.No.35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon and the same has been acquired through registered 22 L.A.C. No.50/2010 sale deed dated 21.05.1998 as per Ex.P.37, which was executed by General Power of Attorney holder of Rajanna in-favour of Meenakshi on 21.05.1998. Ex.P.36 is the General Power of Attorney executed by Rajanna in-favour of Rajendran in-respect of property bearing Sy.No. 35/2C measuring 1 acre 4 guntas. Ex.P.34 is General Power of Attorney, which was executed by claimant No.4 Meenakshi in-favour of Parameshwarappa.
.27. Claimant No.4 has stated that during pendency of the acquisition proceedings, the respondents have published a scheme for revenue site holders promising that they will allot alternative sites to them at the then prevailing rate in the same layout and asked the revenue site holders to apply for the sites in the prescribed format and within stipulated time. Upon satisfying her ownership and possession, the respondents had allotted alternative sites in their new layout at her cost. It is stated that the respondent-LAO without referring his ownership and 23 L.A.C. No.50/2010 possession over the property in question, had passed the award on 28.11.2002. But no award notice was served on her. After coming to know about the award, she requested the LAO to pay the compensation amount, the respondent No.1 has sent the reference to this Court. It is stated that as claimant No.4 is absolute owner of the acquired land, she is entitled for the compensation to the extent of property acquired along with other statutory benefits. .28. During cross-examination PW.6 has stated that she purchased site No.3 and it is within Sy.No. 35/2C. She has stated that she has produced the documents to show that her site is within Sy.No. 35/2C. She denied the suggestion that site is not within the Sy.No.35/2C. Ex.P.37 is the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 in-favour of claimant No.4. From the above documents produced by the claimant No.4, it is clear that claimant No.4 was the owner of 40 X 30 feet site and the respondent No.1 - BDA recognizing this fact, has allotted alternative site 24 L.A.C. No.50/2010 at the prevailing rate. So I am of the considered view that claimant No.4 is entitled for compensation to the extent of 40 X 30 feet out of deposited amount by the respondent No.1.
.29. Claimant No.5 Renuka (PW.3) has stated that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing No.12, khatha No.35/2C, formed out of Sy.No.35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon and the same has been acquired through sale deed dated 04.11.1999. Ex.P.18 is the sale deed dated 04.11.1999 executed by K.M. Rajendran in-favour of claimant No.5 to the extent of 40 X 30 feet. Ex.P.19 is the demand register extract and name of claimant No.5 has been entered as owner in-respect of property No.12.
.30. PW.5 has stated that during pendency of the acquisition proceedings, the respondents have 25 L.A.C. No.50/2010 published a scheme for revenue site holders promising that they will allot alternative sites to them at the then prevailing rate in the same layout and asked the revenue site holders to apply for the sites in the prescribed format and within stipulated time. Upon satisfying his ownership and possession, the respondents had allotted alternative sites in their new layout at his cost. It is stated that the respondent- LAO without referring his ownership and possession over the property in question, had passed the award on 28.11.2002. But no award notice was served on claimant No.5. Later, she got knowledge about the award and requested the L.A.O. to pay the compensation amount by submitting relevant documents. But the L.A.O. did not pay the award amount. On enquiry, she came to know that the respondent No.1 has sent the reference to this Court. It is stated that as claimant No.5 is absolute owner of the acquired land she is entitled for the compensation to the extent of property acquired along with other 26 L.A.C. No.50/2010 statutory benefits. During cross-examination she denied the suggestion that she has not purchased site in the acquired land. She admits that she has not produced the GPA executed by Rajanna in-favour of Rajendran.
.31. Ex.P.21 is the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 in-favour of claimant No.5. From the above documents produced by the claimant No.5, it is clear that claimant No.5 was the owner of 40 X 30 feet site and the respondent No.1 - BDA recognizing this fact, has allotted alternative site at the prevailing rate. So I am of the considered view that claimant No.5 is entitled for compensation to the extent of 40 X 30 feet out of deposited amount by the respondent No.1. .32. PW.4 Parameshwarappa - General Power of Attorney holder of claimant No.12-G.S. Sumangala has stated she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing House List No.6, khatha No.35/2C, formed out of Sy.No.35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri 27 L.A.C. No.50/2010 Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon and the same has been acquired through sale deed dated 14.10.1999. Ex.P.26 is the sale deed executed by Rajendran in-favour of claimant No.4 to the extent of 40 X 30 feet. Ex.P.25 is the General Power of Attorney executed by Sumangala in-favour of Parameshwarappa. Ex.P.27 is the notice. .33. During the cross-examination he denied that he has not produced the documents to show that site mentioned in Ex.P.26 was formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No. 35/2C. Ex.P.26 sale deed clearly discloses that site has been formed in Sy.No. 35/2C. .34. Claimant No.12 has stated that during pendency of the acquisition proceedings, the respondents have published a scheme for revenue site holders promising that they will allot alternative sites to them at the then prevailing rate in the same layout and asked the revenue site holders to apply for the sites in the prescribed format and within stipulated 28 L.A.C. No.50/2010 time. Upon satisfying her ownership and possession, the respondents had allotted alternative sites in their new layout at her cost. It is stated that the respondent-LAO without referring his ownership and possession over the property in question, had passed the award on 02.12.2002. But no award notice was served on claimant No.12. Later on she came to know that the respondent No.1 has sent the reference to this Court. It is stated that as claimant No.12 is absolute owner of the acquired land she is entitled for the compensation to the extent of property acquired along with other statutory benefits.
.35. Ex.P.28 is the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 in-favour of claimant No.12. From the above documents produced by the claimant No.12, it is clear that claimant No.12 was the owner of 40 X 30 feet site and the respondent No.1 - BDA recognizing this fact, has allotted alternative site at the prevailing rate. So I am of the considered view that claimant No.12 is entitled for compensation to the 29 L.A.C. No.50/2010 extent of 40 X 30 feet out of deposited amount by the respondent No.1.
.36. PW.5 - Parameshwarappa, General Power of Attorney holder of claimant No.14- R. Siddappa has stated he was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing House List No.21, khatha No.35/29, formed out of Sy.No.35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon and the same has been acquired through sale deed dated 21.05.1998. Ex.P.30 is the sale deed executed by Rajendran in-favour of claimant No.14 to the extent of 40 X 30 feet. Ex.P.29 is the General Power of Attorney executed by R. Siddappa in-favour of Parameshwarappa. Ex.P.31 is the tax demand register, which discloses that the claimant No.14 is the owner of property No.21. Ex.P.32 is the notice.
.37. During the cross-examination PW.5 denied that he has not produced the documents to show that 30 L.A.C. No.50/2010 site mentioned in Ex.P.30 was formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No. 35/2C. Claimant No.14 has stated that during pendency of the acquisition proceedings, the respondents have published a scheme for revenue site holders promising that they will allot alternative sites to them at the then prevailing rate in the same layout and asked the revenue site holders to apply for the sites in the prescribed format and within stipulated time. Upon satisfying his ownership and possession, the respondents had allotted alternative sites in their new layout at her cost. It is stated that the respondent-LAO without referring to his ownership and possession over the property in question, had passed the award on 28.11.2002. But no award notice was served on claimant No.14. Later on he came to know that the respondent No.1 has sent the reference to this Court. It is stated that as claimant No.14 is absolute owner of the acquired land he is entitled for the compensation to the extent of property acquired along with other statutory benefits. 31
L.A.C. No.50/2010 .38. Ex.P.33 is the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 in-favour of claimant No.14. From the above documents produced by the claimant No.14, it is clear that claimant No.14 was the owner of 40 X 30 feet site and the respondent No.1 - BDA recognizing this fact, has allotted alternative site at the prevailing rate. So I am of the considered view that claimant No.14 is entitled for compensation to the extent of 40 X 30 feet out of deposited amount by the respondent No.1.
.39. Claimant No.15 Mangala (PW.2) has stated that she was the absolute owner, in possession and enjoyment of the residential property bearing No.11, khatha No.35/2C, formed out of Sy.No.35/2C, situated at Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, measuring 40 X 30 feet along with one sq. A.C. sheet roofed house thereon and the same has been acquired through sale deed dated 27.03.1999. Ex.P.12 is the sale deed dated 27.03.1999 executed by K.M. Rajendran in-favour of 32 L.A.C. No.50/2010 claimant No.15 to the extent of 40 X 30 feet. Ex.P.13 and 14 are two tax paid receipts. Ex.P.15 is demand register extract. In the said documents, name of the claimant No.15 has been mentioned as owner in- respect of property No.11. During the cross- examination she has denied the suggestion that survey number is not mentioned in the sale deed executed in her favour. PW.2 has stated that during pendency of the acquisition proceedings, the respondents have published a scheme for revenue site holders promising that they will allot alternative sites to them at the then prevailing rate in the same layout and asked the revenue site holders to apply for the sites in the prescribed format and within stipulated time. Upon satisfying his ownership and possession, the respondents had allotted alternative sites in their new layout at his cost. It is stated that the respondent-LAO without referring to his ownership and possession over the property in question, had passed the award on 28.11.2002. But no award notice 33 L.A.C. No.50/2010 was served on claimant No.15. Later, she got knowledge about the award and requested the L.A.O. to pay the compensation amount by submitting relevant documents. But the L.A.O. did not pay the award amount. On enquiry, she came to know that the respondent No.1 has sent the reference to this Court. It is stated that as claimant No.5 is absolute owner of the acquired land she is entitled for the compensation to the extent of property acquired along with other statutory benefits.
.40. Ex.P.12 is the sale deed executed by respondent No.1 in-favour of claimant No.15. From the above documents produced by the claimant No.15, it is clear that claimant No.15 was the owner of 40 X 30 feet site and the respondent No.1 - BDA recognizing this fact, has allotted alternative site at the prevailing rate. So I am of the considered view that claimant No.15 is entitled for compensation to the extent of 40 X 30 feet out of deposited amount by the respondent No.1.
34
L.A.C. No.50/2010 .41. In view of the above discussion, I answer point No. 1 partly in the affirmative, points 2 to 6 in the affirmative.
.42. Point No.7: Though claimants 9, 24 and 28 have entered appearance through their counsels and had filed claim statement, did not lead evidence to prove their ownership of the acquired land. Claimants 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13 and 20 have entered appearance through their advocates, did not choose to file claim statement and prove their ownership. Claimants 16 to 19, 21 to 27 in-spite of service of notice remained absent. Therefore reference made by respondent No.1 in-respect of claimants 1, 3, 6 to 11, 13, 16 to 28 is liable to be rejected. Accordingly I answered point No.7 in the negative.
.43. POINT NO.8: In view of my finding on point No.1, I proceed to pass the following:
35
L.A.C. No.50/2010 OR D E R The reference made by the respondent No.1/LAO under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is hereby partly allowed.
The claimant No.2 - N. Pasha S/o
Babajohn is entitle for compensation
amount awarded in-respect of land
measuring 2156 sq. feet in Sy.No.35/2C of Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, out of 1 acre 4 guntas along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.4 - Meenakshi W/o Ramegowda is entitle for compensation amount awarded in-respect of site measuring 40 X 30 feet in Sy.No.35/2C of Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, out of 1 acre 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.5 - Renuka W/o Mallaradhya N.C. is entitle for compensation amount awarded in-respect of site measuring 40 X 30 feet in 36 L.A.C. No.50/2010 Sy.No.35/2C of Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, out of 1 acre 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.12 - Smt. Sumangala W/o T.V. Jagadish Babu is entitle for compensation amount awarded in-respect of site measuring 40 X 30 feet in Sy.No.35/2C of Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, out of 1 acre 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.14 - R. Siddappa S/o Revanna is entitle for compensation amount awarded in-respect of site measuring 40 X 30 feet in Sy.No.35/2C of Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, out of 1 acre 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.15 - Mangala W/o N.G. Paramesh is entitle for compensation amount awarded in-respect of site 37 L.A.C. No.50/2010 measuring 40 X 30 feet in Sy.No.35/2C of Ramasandra village, Kengeri Hobli, Bengaluru South Taluka, out of 1 acre 4 guntas in Sy.No. 35/2C along with accrued interest thereon.
Claimants 2, 4, 5, 12, 14 and 15 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.
Reference against claimants 1, 3, 6 to 11, 13, 16 to 28 is 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 4th day of August, 2021.) (Sheila B.M.) II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge, Bangalore 38 L.A.C. No.50/2010 ANNEXURE
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR CLAIMANT No.7:
P.W.1 S. Pasha P.W.2 Mangala P.W.3 Renuka P.W.4 Parameshwarappa H P.W.5 Parameshwarappa H P.W.6 Parameshwarappa H
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE CLAIMANTS:
Ex.P.1 Certified copy of sale deed dated 15.09.1995 Ex.P.2 to 4 Encumbrance certificates Ex.P.5 RTC extract for the year 2012-13 Ex.P.6 Mutation register extract Ex.P.7 Tax paid receipt Ex.P.8 Kandaya no due certificate dated 19.10.2011 Ex.P.9 Family genealogical tree Ex.P.10 Endorsement issued by Tahsildar dated 30.08.2011 Ex.P.11 Endorsement issued by A.C. dated 02.09.2011 Ex.P.12 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 27.03.1999 Ex.P.13 & 14 Two tax paid receipts Ex.P.15 Demand Register Extract of form No.10 Ex.P.16 Notice Ex.P.17 Certified copy of registered sale 39 L.A.C. No.50/2010 deed dated 17.12.2011 Ex.P.18 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 04.11.1999 Ex.P.19 Certified copy of Demand Register Extract of Form No.10 (Revenue demand register for the year 1998-
99) Ex.P.20 Notice issued by BDA Ex.P.21 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 17.05.2012 Ex.P.22 RTC extract Ex.P.23 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 02.03.2000 Ex.P.24 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 20.05.2000 Ex.P.25 GPA Ex.P.26 Certified copy of sale deed dated 14.10.1999 Ex.P.27 Notice Ex.P.28 Certified copy of sale deed dated 16.09.2011 Ex.P.29 GPA Ex.P.30 Certified copy of sale deed dated 21.05.1998 Ex.P.31 Extract of tax demand register Ex.P.32 Notice Ex.P.33 Certified copy of sale deed dated 13.10.2011 Ex.P.34 SPA executed by claimant No.4 Ex.P.35 Covering letter issued by RTI Officer (Sub-Registrar office, Kengeri) 40 L.A.C. No.50/2010 Ex.P.36 GPA Ex.P.37 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 21.05.1998 Ex.P.38 Certified copy of registered sale deed dated 16.05.2011
3. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENTS:
Nil
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENTS:
Nil (Sheila B.M.), II Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, & Spl. Judge Bangalore.
41 L.A.C. No.50/2010