Bangalore District Court
L.A.C./147/2002 on 15 October, 2019
1
LAC No 147/2002
IN THE COURT OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND
SESSIONS JUDGE AT BANGALORE (C.C.H. No.17)
Dated this the 15 th day of October, 2019.
PRESENT:
Shri. R.Y. Shashidhara, B.Com.,LL.B.
II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore.
: LAND ACQUISITION CASE NO.147/2002 :
CLAIMANTS :
1) Smt. Nanjamma W/o Chikkavenkatappa,
Byatarayanapura, Yelahanka Hobli, Bengaluru.
2) K.C. Aswath, No.673, Block No.3, N-LIG 5 th phase,
Yelahanka New Town, Bengaluru.
3) B. Janardhan S/o Gangagirao, 55 years, No.188/1,
4th cross, 5th Block, Banashankari 3rd stage,
Bengaluru.
4) B. Sanjivrao S/o late. B. Sriramulu, 64 years, 601,
Ground floor, 21st cross, 1st main, RT Nagar,
Bengaluru.
5) T. Siddagangamma, 50 years, W/o Mutturayappa,
No.2578, 11th main, E Block, Rajajinagar, 2nd stage,
Bengaluru.
6) Sandhyarani K.R. 39 years, D/o K. Ramaiah, No.22,
2nd phase, Anjaneya nagara, BSK 3rd stage,
Bengaluru.
7) D. Sheenashetty, 59 years, S/o Koragappa, 653,
Anugraha 5th cross, 10th main, BSK, Bengaluru-50.
2
LAC No 147/2002
8) C. Shashidhara, 54 years, S/o late. Dr.
N.Channabasappa, R/at: No.55, 2nd cross, T.V.
Venugopal layout, Ganganagar, Bengaluru-32.
9) Smt. Brundavati D/o Doddalingaiah, R/at: # 1/7,
Shivangiri Nilaya, Hebbal-Kempapura last bus stop,
Bengaluru-24.
10) Smt. Sujatha W/o D.G. Jaganatha Rao, 48 years,
R/at: # 1050, 1st Block 1st stage, Manasanagara,
Nagarabhavi, Bengaluru-72.
11) C. Jagadish S/o late. Chikkabalappa, 25 years,
R/at: # 83,, near Maramma temple, Amruthahalli,
Kellappa layout, Bengaluru-92.
12) Bolappa S/o late. Nanjanna, R/at: No.83, near
Maramma temple, Amruthahalli, Bengaluru-92.
13) N. Jayashankar S/o B.M. Narayanappa, 59
years, R/at No.15, near Vinayaka Vidhya Kendra,
Byatarayanapura, Bengaluru-92.
14) B. Saroja W/o N. Jayashankar, 59 years, R/at
No.15, near Vinayaka Vidhya Kendra,
Byatarayanapura, Bengaluru-92.
15) Smt. Nagarathna M.Bhat,
Aged 55 years. W/o Late Mahalinga Bhat,
R/at 837, 2nd cross extension,
Colony, R.T. Nagara Bengaluru-92.
(By Sri. BNP, Advocate)
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENT :
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, B.B.M.P.,
Bengaluru.
(By Sri. NRJ, Advocate )
3
LAC No 147/2002
: JUDGMENT :
The Special Land Acquisition Officer (here-in-after referred as SLAO), Bengaluru, has made this reference u/Ss.30 and 31(2) of Land Acquisition Act 1894 (here-in-after referred as L.A. Act), for apportionment of compensation amount.
.2. As per the records, the S.L.A.O., has acquired the land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas, situated at Bytarayanapura, Village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk for propose establishment of APMC yard. Final notification was on 12-05-1988 and awad passed on 18-12-1993. A compensation to an extent of Rs.4,14,120/- has been awarded. Due to some dispute between the parties, the respondent has deposited the said amount before this court for apportionment.
.3. After receipt of reference, this court has registered the case and issued notice to both the parties. Initially, the respondent has referred the case in respect of claimant- Smt. Nanjamma. During the pendency of the case, claimant No.2 to 15 are impleaded themselves. Both claimants and respondent are appeared before this court through their counsels. 4
LAC No 147/2002 .4. In order to prove their case, the claimant No.1, 6, 11, 12 and 15 have not adduced oral evidence and got marked documents. Claimant No.5, 3, 7, 4, 9, 10, 8 and 13 examined themselves as PW-1 to 7 and 9 respectively. Son and GPA holder of claimant No.2 examined as PW.8. GPA holder of claimant No.14 examined as PW-10. Documents got marked at Exs.P.1 to 84. The respondent has not adduced oral evidence and got marked documents.
.5. Heard the arguments and perused the records. .6. The following points that would arise for my consideration are:
(1) Whether the Claimant No.1 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(2) Whether the Claimant No.2 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(3) Whether the Claimant No.3 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(4) Whether the Claimant No.4 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?5
LAC No 147/2002 (5) Whether the Claimant No.5 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(6) Whether the Claimant No.6 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(7) Whether the Claimant No.7 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(8) Whether the Claimant No.8 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(9) Whether the Claimant No.9 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(10)Whether the Claimant No.10 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(11)Whether the Claimant No.11 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(12)Whether the Claimant No.12 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(13)Whether the Claimant No.13 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
6
LAC No 147/2002 (14)Whether the Claimant No.14 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(15)Whether the Claimant No.15 is entitle to receive the compensation amount disputed in this case?
(16)What order or award?
.7. My findings on the above points are:
Point No.1 : In the negative, Point No.2 : In the negative, Point No.3 : In the affirmative, Point No.4 : In the affirmative, Point No.5 : In the partly affirmative, Point No.6 : In the negative, Point No.7 : In the affirmative, Point No.8 : In the affirmative, Point No.9 : In the affirmative, Point No.10 : In the affirmative, Point No.11 :1n the negative, Point No.12: In the negative, Point No.13 : In the partly affirmative, 7 LAC No 147/2002 Point No.14 : In the affirmative, Point No.15 : In the negative, Point No.16 : As per final order, for the following:
REASONS .8. POINT No.1: To prove her case, the claimant No.1 Nanjamma W/o Chikkavenkatappa has not adduced oral evidence and produced documents. As per the records, on 21.12.2009, one Bolappa claiming as son and legal heir of claimant No.1 has filed evidence affidavit. But he has not produced any documents and got marked in evidence. He has also not tendered for cross- examination. More-over, the claimant No.2 to 15 are claiming that, the claimant No.1 - Nanjamma was the owner of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas of Byatarayanapura Village. She got converted the said land into residential purpose vide order dated 23.01.1986 by the Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District, Bengaluru. She formed sites in the said land and sold to the various persons. They further contended that, they purchased sites through registered sale 8 LAC No 147/2002 deeds. In view of sale of sites, the claimant No.1 lost her title over the acquired land. I am of the opinion that, the above said contention of the claimant No.2 to 15 is not at all denied by the claimant No.1. In the cross examination of PW-1 to 10, the claimant No.1 has not challenged their case that they purchased sits in the acquired land by way of registered sale deed. From the above, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.1 has not proved her title over acquired land. Hence, she is not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in respect of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura Village. Therefore, I answer point No.1 in the negative.
.9. Point No.2:- PW-8-K.A. Nandakumar S/o K.C. Ashwath deposed by way of filing evidence affidavit. He has deposed on behalf of claimant No.2. He has stated that he and his father-K.C. Ashwath (claimant No.2) are the irrevocable joint GPA holders and agreement of sale holders from Smt. Nanjamma (claimant No.1) and her children in respect of acquired land. He further deposed that his father is old aged person and not having 9 LAC No 147/2002 good health. Hence he is conducting the litigations on behalf of his father. On 24.04.1995 they obtained irrevocable GPA and agreement of sale. The claimant No.1 and her children have agreed to sell the said land for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. Out of the same they paid advance of Rs.75,000/- at the time of sale agreement. Remaining amount paid in the year 1985 and possession taken. He further sated that original sale deed not executed in their favour due to various reasons. He further deposed that name of the original owner -claimant No.1 was continued in the revenue records. They got converted the acquired land in the name of claimant No.1 vide office memorandum dated 23.01.1986 by the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore and paid for a sum of Rs.61,019/-for conversion charges. After the said conversion, they were formed lay-out with the approval of the authority, sold number of sites to the several people and majority of land was in their hands at the time of acquisitions. He further deposed that they filed objections to the acquisition notification and contested the case on behalf of claimant No.1. In spite of same, respondent/SLAO has published acquisition notification in the name of claimant No.1. He further stated that, he and his father 10 LAC No 147/2002 are the joint irrevocable GPA and agreement of sale holders and there are necessary parties to this case. He further deposed that, in his individual capacity had entered in to an agreement for repurchase the site bearing No.39 measuring 30 X 40 feet from Smt. H.V.Sudhamani. She had purchased said site from claimant No.1 through agreement of sale. Hence, he prayed for to consider their claim over the land and order for their appropriate share in the compensation amount. He further stated that his father died on 05.02.2009 and he is the sole GPA holder of the land in the question.
.10. To prove his case, the claimant No.2 has produced documents and got marked in the evidence of PW-8. Ex.P.64 is general power of attorney dated 01.12.1997 executed by claimant No.2 is favour of his son (PW-8) and permitted him for prosecute this case on his behalf. Ex.P.62 is agreement of sale for receiving advance amount. Ex.P.62(a) is typed copy of Ex.P.62. This document executed by the Claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma and her children in favour of claimant No.2 and PW-8. They agreed to sell the acquired land for consideration of Rs.1,50,000/- per acre and 11 LAC No 147/2002 received advance amount of Rs.75,000/-. It was agreed that the vendors have to execute the registered sale deed in favour of claimant No.2 and PW.8 within 11 months from the date of Ex.P.62.
.11. Ex.P.63 is irrevocable power of attorney dated 24.05.1985 executed by Claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma and her children in favour of claimant No.2 and PW-8 in respect of acquired property measuring 2 acres 32 guntas in Sy.No.15/3 of Byatarayanapura village. They given right to the claimant No.2 and PW.8 to manage the property, construction of house, apply for any negotiations, for obtaining BWSSB, electricity connection, to execute transfer deed, sale deeds etc. Ex.P.65 is certified copy of official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 issued by office of the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District. The sanction has been granted for conversion of acquired property into non-agricultural residential purpose. Ex.P.66 is conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahasildar, Bangalore North Taluka dated 29.01.1986. Ex.P.67 is notice dated 28.10.1985 issued by the Special Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District in the name of 12 LAC No 147/2002 claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma and directed her to pay conversion charges. Ex.P.68 is the receipt dated 20.02.1986 issued by the Secretary Group Panchayath, Byatarayanapura for payment of Rs.172/- by claimant No.1. Ex.P.69 is challan is in the name of claimant No.1 for payment of conversion charge of Rs.61,019/-.
.12. I have perused the oral testimony of PW.8 along with documentary evidence. As per the records, father of PW.8 K.C. Ashwath shown as claimant No.2 of this case. PW.8 claiming that he is the son of claimant No. 2. As stated above, the PW.8 in his examination-in-chief stated that his father K.C. Ashwath hsad ill- health and not in good condition to conduct the litigation. Therefore, he had executed GPA (Ex.P.64) in his favour to prosecute the present case. PW.1 further stated that his father died on 05.02.2009. Hence, now he is sole GPA holder to the acquired land. PW-8 has produced death certificate of claimant No.2 and got marked as Ex.P.76. It is mentioned that claimant No.2 died on 05.02.2009.
.13. I am of the opinion that, after death of his father - claimant No.2 in the year 2009, PW.8 has not chosen for 13 LAC No 147/2002 impleading him as LR of deceased claimant No. 2. Ex.P.64 of GPA executed by the claimant No. 2 on 01.12.1997 in favour of PW.8. The claimant No. 2 died on 05.02.2009. Therefore, the GPA executed by the claimant No. 2 was ended along with his death. As per the records, PW.8 K.A. Nandakumar, deposed before this court on 07.03.2011. Hence, it is clear that, as on the date of evidence of PW.8, Ex.P.64 of GPA executed by the claimant No. 2 was not in existence. Without impleading as LR of deceased claimant No. 2 and without any authority, PW.8 deposed evidence before this court and it cannot be considered in the eye of law.
.14. PW.8 further deposed that as per Ex.P.62, the claimant No. 1 and her children executed an agreement of sale and agreed to execute the sale of acquired land for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/-. Out of the same, they received Rs.75,000/- as an advance and agreed to execute the regular sale deed within 11 months from the date of the said agreement of sale. I am of the opinion that PW.8 has not proved Ex.P.62 as per law. He has not explained before this court why he and his father (claimant No. 2) have obtained the registered sale deed on the basis of the alleged Ex.P.62. PW.8 14 LAC No 147/2002 has not produced documentary evidence before this court that he and his father having title, they were in possession and enjoyment of the acquired land as on the date of preliminary notification. I am of the opinion that, no sale deed executed in favour of the claimant No.2 and PW.8 on the basis of alleged agreement of sale (Ex.P.62). Further, I am of the opinion that without transfer of title by way of registered sale deed, on the basis of Ex.P.62 of agreement of sale and Ex.P.63 of irrevocable power of attorney, no title transferred in favour of claimant No.2 and PW.8. The claimant No.2 has not produced documentary evidence to prove his title over acquired land. Hence, the claimant No.2 and his son PW.8 are not entitle compensation in respect of acquired land. As discussed above, the claimant No.2 reported to be died on 05.02.2009. Thereafter, his LRs are not brought on record. Hence, I am of the opinion that, case against claimant No.2 stands abated.
.15. PW.8 deposed that, in his individual capacity had entered into an agreement for repurchase the site No. 39 measuring 30X40 feet from Smt. H.V. Sudhamani. To prove the same, he has produced agreement of sale dated 17.10.1995 and 15 LAC No 147/2002 got marked as Ex.P.71. It is mentioned that one Dr. H.V. Sudhamani executed the said agreement of sale in favour of PW.8 in respect of site No. 39 in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village. She agreed to sell the said site for a sum of Rs.75,000/- and received an advance amount of Rs.40,000/-. She agreed to execute the registered sale deed within 4 months from the date of the said agreement of sale. PW.8 further stated that H.V. Sudhamani had purchased site No.39 from Smt. Nanjamma. To prove the same, he has produced Ex.P.70 of the sale deed executed by Nanjamma in favour of Smt. H.V. Sudhamani. The claimant No.1 sold site No. 39 in Sy.No. 15/3 to H.V. Sudhamani for a consideration of Rs.10,000/- and possession of property handed over to her.
.16. PW.8 has produced certified copy of sale deed dated 07.06.2001 and got marked as Ex.P.72. Recitals of the sale deed disclosing that, Talakaveri Gruha Nirmana Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha (R), Bengaluru executed sale deed in favour of one R.G. Nagarajaiah and sold site No.409 situated at Amruthahalli village. He has produced certified copy of sale deed dated 10.04.2003 and got marked as Ex.P.73. Recitals of the sale deed disclosing that, 16 LAC No 147/2002 Talakaveri Gruha Nirmana Sahakara Sangha Niyamitha (R), Bengaluru executed sale deed in favour of one M. ChandREShekaraiah and sold site No.410 situated at Amruthahalli village. He has produced certified copy of sale deed dated 11.06.2007 and got marked as Ex.P.74. This sale deed executed by M. ChandREShekaraiah in favour of S.R. Amarnath for sale of site No.410 of Amruthahalli village. He has produced certified copy of sale deed dated 19.01.2005 and got marked as Ex.P.75. This sale deed executed by R.G. Nagarajaiah in favour of Smt. C. Lalitha for sale of site No.409 of Amruthahalli village. I have carefully perused the Ex.P.72 to 75 of the sale deeds and I am of the opinion that, these documents are not relating to the case on hand. PW.8 in his evidence has not stated about why he has produced Ex.P.72 to 75 in this case. Hence, I am of the opinion that these documents will not help the case of the PW.8 and claimant No.2.
.17. Considering the same, I am of the opinion that on the basis of Ex.P.71 of agreement of sale, no registered sale deed executed in favour of PW.8 and no title transferred in respect of 17 LAC No 147/2002 site No.39 formed in acquired land. PW.8 has not impleaded in this case as a party to the case and claiming compensation amount in respect of site No.39. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that the claimant No.2 and PW.8 - K.A. Nandakumar are not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in respect of acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. PW.8 is also not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in respect of alleged site No.39 measuring 30 x 40 feet formed in acquired land. Hence, I answer the point No.2 in the negative.
.18. Point No.3:- PW.2 G. Janardhana S/o late. B. Gangojirao deposed by way of filing affidavit. He is claimant No. 3 of this case. He has deposed that, he is the bonafide purchaser of site Nos.31 and 32, measuring 30 x 40 feet each, in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deeds dated 16.03.1987. He is the owner and in possession of the above said two sites. The Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the acquired land into non-agricultural residential 18 LAC No 147/2002 purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. He purchased the sites in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing the residential houses. His name entered in the records in-respect of the above said 2 sites and he is paying tax.
.19. He further deposed that without his knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma. He further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her right and title over the said land. He further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. He is entitle to receive the compensation amount in-respect of the sites purchased by him.
.20. To prove his case, the claimant No. 3 has produced sale deed dated 16.03.1987 and got marked Ex.P.11. The recital of 19 LAC No 147/2002 sale deed discloses that one Krishnojirao S/o Gangojirao sold site No. 31 in favour of claimant No.3 for a consideration of Rs.12,000/-. Possession of the said property handed over to the claimant No. 3. Ex.P.12 is the sale deed dated 14.08.1986 executed by the claimant No. 1 Smt. Nanjamma and her children in favour of Krishnojirao, who is vendor of the claimant No. 3. The claimant No. 3 has produced the sale deed dated 16.03.1987 executed by one Smt. Neelabai W/o Gopala Rao in his favour in respect of site No. 32. Ex.P.13 is the sale deed dated 14.08.1986 executed by the claimant No. 1 Smt. Nanjamma and her children in favour of Neelabai, who is vendor of the claimant No. 3. Ex.P.14 is notarized copy of official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of acquired land from agricultural into non-agricultural residential purposes. It is in the name of claimant No.1. Ex.P.15 is the notarized copy of notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner to the claimant No. 1 for payment of conversion charge of Rs.61,019/-. Ex.P.16 is the notarized copy of conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.17 and 18 are the Tax assessment extracts for the year 1988-89 issued by Group 20 LAC No 147/2002 Panchayath, Byatarayanapura. These documents discloses that 2 sites measuring 30 X 40 feet each in Sy. No.15/3 are in the name of claimant No.3. Ex.P.19 is one tax paid receipt in the name of claimant No.3. Ex.P.20 is the notarised copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA_RES). One Dasharath Rao and 3 others had filed the said Writ petition and prayed for quashing the acquisition notification issued in respect of land bearing Sy,. No.15/3 of Byatarayanapura village. Considering the award passed by the SLAO and possession of the land taken by the government, the Hon'ble court dismissed the said writ petition. Liberty granted to the petitioners to make an application seeking compensation from the LAO. Order of Hon'ble High Court as stated supra produced by other claimants also.
.21. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.2 and documents produced by him. It is noticed that other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.2 and documentary evidence produced by him. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.3 has proved that the claimant 21 LAC No 147/2002 No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.3 has proved that the claimant No.1 and her children sold site No.31 and 32 in favour of Krishnoji Rao and Neelabai through registered sale deeds dated 14.08.1986. He further proved that as per registered sale deeds dated 16.03.1987, he purchased site No.31 and 32 from said Krishnoji Rao and Neelabai. As per the sale deeds, the name of the claimant No.3 entered in property records of Byatarayanapura Group Panchayath. He further proved that, he was the owner and possession of site No.31 and 32 measuring 30 X 40 feet each formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. He further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost her right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.3 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.31 22 LAC No 147/2002 and 32 measuring 30 X 40 feet each formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 3 in the affirmative.
.22. Point No.4:- PW.4 B. Sanjivrao S/o late. B. Sriramulu deposed by way of filing affidavit. He is claimant No. 4 of this case. He has deposed that, he is the bonafide purchaser of site No.37 measuring 30 X 40 feet, in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deed dated 24.11.1986. He is the owner and in possession of the above said site. He further deposed that the Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the acquired land into non-agricultural residential purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. He purchased the site in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing the residential houses. His name entered in the records and he is paying tax.
.23. He further deposed that without his knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma w/o Chikkavenkatappa. He further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her 23 LAC No 147/2002 right and title over the said land. He further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. He is entitle to receive the compensation amount in- respect of the site purchased by him.
.24. To prove his case, the claimant No. 4 has produced sale deed dated 24.11.1986 and got marked Ex.P.30. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma sold site No. 37 in favour of claimant No.4 for a consideration of Rs.10,000/-. Possession of the said property handed over to the claimant No.4. Ex.P.31 is notarized official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of acquired land from agricultural into non-agricultural residential purposes. Ex.P.32 is the notarized copy of notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner to the claimant No. 1 for payment of conversion charge of Rs.61,019/-. Ex.P.33 are the challans for payment of conversion 24 LAC No 147/2002 charge by claimant No.1. Ex.P.34 is the notarized copy of conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.35 is the notarized copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA_RES).
.25. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.4 and documents produced by him. Other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.4 and documentary evidence produced by him. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.4 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.4 has proved that the claimant No.1 and her children sold site No.37 in his favour through registered sale deeds dated 24.11.1986. He further proved that, he was the owner and possession of site No.37 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at 25 LAC No 147/2002 Byatarayanapura village. He further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.4 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.37 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 4 in the affirmative.
.26. Point No.5:- PW.1 Smt. T. Siddagangamma W/o Muttarayappa deposed by way of filing affidavit. She is claimant No. 5 of this case. She has deposed that, she is the bonafide purchaser of site Nos.55 and 56, measuring 30 X 40 feet each, in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deeds dated 24.11.1986 and 21.12.1992 respectively. She is the owner and in possession of the above said two sites. She further deposed that the Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the acquired land into non-agricultural residential purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. She purchased the sites in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing 26 LAC No 147/2002 the residential houses. Her name entered in the records in-respect of the above said 2 sites and she is paying tax.
.27. She further deposed that without his knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma w/o Chikkavenkatappa. She further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her right and title over the said land. She further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. She is entitle to receive the compensation amount in- respect of the sites purchased by her.
.28. To prove her case, the claimant No. 1 has produced sale deed dated 24.11.1986 and got marked Ex.P.1. The recital of sale deed discloses that claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma and her children sold sold site No.55 in favour of Thimmoji Poul and P.V. 27 LAC No 147/2002 Johnson for a consideration of Rs.10,000/-. Possession of the said property handed over to them. Ex.P.2 is the sale deed dated 21.12.1992 executed by Thimmoji Poul and P.V. Johnson in favour of claimant No.5 in respect of site No. 55. Ex.P.3 is notarized copy of official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of acquired land from agricultural into non-agricultural residential purposes. Ex.P.4 is the notarized copy of notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner to the claimant No. 1 for payment of conversion charge of Rs.61,019/-. Ex.P.5 are two challans for payment of conversion charges by claimant No.1. Ex.P.6 is the notarized copy of conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.7 is the notarized copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA_RES).
.29. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.1 and documents produced by her. It is noticed that other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.1 and documentary evidence produced by her. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.5 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the 28 LAC No 147/2002 acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.5 has proved that the claimant No.1 and her children sold site No.55 in her favour of Thimmoji Poul and P.V. Johnson for a consideration of Rs.10,000/- through Ex.P.1 of sale deed. She further proved that as per Ex.P.2 of sale deed, she purchased site No.55 from Thimmoji Poul and P.V. Johnson. She further proved that, she was the owner and possession of site No.55 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.5 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.55 measuring 30 x 40 feet in the acquired land.
.30. The claimant No.5 contended that she purchased site No.56 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in Sy. No.15/3 of 29 LAC No 147/2002 Byatarayanapura village through registered sale deed dated 21.12.1992. As per the said sale deed her name entered in the panchyath records, she is the owner and in possession of the site No.56. But to prove the same, she has not produced alleged sale deed dated 21.12.1992. She has also not produced documents entered in the Group Panchayath in respect of site No.56. Hence, I come to the conclusion that the claimant No.5 has failed to prove that she is the owner of the site No.56 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land. But as discussed above, she has proved that she is the owner of the site No.55 formed in the acquired land. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that the claimant No.5 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.55 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land in question. The case of the claimant No.5 in respect of site No.56 is liable to be rejected. Accordingly, I answer point No. 5 in the partly affirmative.
.31. POINT No.6: To prove her case, the claimant No.6 Smt. Sandhya Rani K.R. W/o K. Ramaiah has not adduced oral evidence and produced documents. Therefore, I come to the 30 LAC No 147/2002 conclusion that, the claimant No.6 has not proved her title over acquired land. Hence, she is not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in the acquired land in question bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Bytarayanapura Village. Therefore, I answer point No.6 in the negative.
.32. Point No.7:- PW.3 D. Seenashetty s/o Koragappa Shetty deposed by way of filing affidavit. He is claimant No. 7 of this case. He has deposed that, he is the bonafide purchaser of site No.23 measuring 30 X 40 feet, in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deed dated 20.10.1986. He is the owner and in possession of the above said site. He further deposed that the Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the acquired land into non- agricultural residential purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. He purchased the site in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing the residential houses. His name entered in the records and he is paying tax.
31
LAC No 147/2002 .33. He further deposed that without his knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma w/o Chikkavenkatappa. He further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her right and title over the said land. He further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. He is entitle to receive the compensation amount in- respect of the site purchased by him.
.34. To prove his case, the claimant No. 7 has produced sale deed dated 20.10.1986 and got marked Ex.P.21. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma sold site No. 23 in favour of claimant No.4 for a consideration of Rs.9,500/-. Possession of the said property handed over to the claimant No.7. Ex.P.22 is one tax paid receipt in the name of 32 LAC No 147/2002 claimant No.7. Ex.P.23 is tax Assessment Extract issued by Group Panchayath, Byatarayanapura. This document discloses that name of claimant No.7 shown as the owner of site No.23 in property No.313 of Byatarayanapura village. Ex.P.24 is notarized copy of official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of acquired land from agricultural into non- agricultural residential purposes. Ex.P.25 are the challans for payment of conversion charge by claimant No.1. Ex.P.26 is the notarized copy of conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.27 is the demand register extract for the year 1986-87 issued by the Group Panchayathi, Byatarayanapura. It is mentioned that claimant No.7 is owner of property No.318. Ex.P.28 is the notarized copy of notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner to the claimant No. 1 for payment of conversion charge of Rs.61,019/-. Ex.P.29 is the notarised copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA-RES).
.35. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.3 and documents produced by him. It is noticed that other claimants 33 LAC No 147/2002 and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.3 and documentary evidence produced by him. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.7 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.7 has proved that the claimant No.1 sold site No.23 in his favour through registered sale deeds dated 20.10.1986 (Ex.P.21). He further proved that, he was the owner and possession of site No.23 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. He further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.7 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.23 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 7 in the affirmative.
34
LAC No 147/2002 .36. Point No.8:- PW.7 C. Shashidhara s/o Dr. N. Channabasappa deposed by way of filing affidavit. He is claimant No. 8 of this case. He has deposed that, he is the bonafide purchaser of site Nos.50 and 51, totally measuring 45 X 40 feet (1800 sq. feet), in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deeds dated 01.12.1987. He further stated that he is the owner and in possession of the above said two sites. The Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. He purchased the sites in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing the residential houses. His name entered in the records in-respect of the above said 2 sites and he is paying tax.
.37. He further deposed that without his knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma w/o Chikkavenkatappa. He further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her 35 LAC No 147/2002 right and title over the said land. He further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. He is entitle to receive the compensation amount in- respect of the sites purchased by him.
.38. To prove his case, the claimant No. 8 has produced sale deed dated 01.12.1987 and got marked Ex.P.55. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No. 1 Smt. Nanjamma and her 6 children sold site Nos.50 and 51 totally measuring 45 X 40 feet in favour of claimant No.8 for a consideration of Rs.15,000/- and possession of the site handed over to the claimant No.8. Ex.P.56 is notarized official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of acquired land from agricultural into non-agricultural residential purposes. Ex.P.57 is the notarized copy of notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner to the claimant No. 1 for payment of conversion charge of Rs.61,019/-. Ex.P.58 is the notarized copy of conversion sanction certificate issued by the 36 LAC No 147/2002 Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.59 are the challans for payment of conversion charges by claimant No.1. Ex.P.60 is the notarised copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA_RES).
.39. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.7 and documents produced by him. It is noticed that other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.7 and documentary evidence produced by him. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.8 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.8 has proved that the claimant No.1 and her children sold site No.50 and 51 in his favour through registered sale deed dated 01.12.1987 (Ex.P.15). He further proved that, he was the owner and possession of site no.50 and 51 totally measuring 45 X 40 feet 37 LAC No 147/2002 formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. He further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.8 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.50 and 51 totally measuring 45 X 40 feet (1800 sq. feet) formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 8 in the affirmative.
.40. Point No.9:- PW.5 Brundavati D/o Doddalingaiah deposed by way of filing affidavit. She is claimant No. 9 of this case. She has deposed that, she is the bonafide purchaser of site No.28 measuring 30 X 40 feet, in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deed dated 22.08.1986. She is the owner and in possession of the above said site. She further deposed that the Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the acquired land into non-agricultural residential purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. She purchased the site in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing the 38 LAC No 147/2002 residential houses. Her name entered in the records and she is paying tax.
.41. She further deposed that without her knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma w/o Chikkavenkatappa. She further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her right and title over the said land. She further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. She is entitle to receive the compensation amount in-respect of the site purchased by her.
.42. To prove her case, the claimant No. 9 has produced sale deed dated 22.08.1986 and got marked Ex.P.36. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma sold site No. 28 in favour of claimant No.9 for a consideration of 39 LAC No 147/2002 Rs.10,000/-. Possession of the said property handed over to the claimant No.7. Ex.P.37 is notarized copy of official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of agricultural land from agricultural into non-agricultural residential purposes. Ex.P.38 is the notice dated 28.10.1985 issued by Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District to the claimant No.1 for payment of conversion charge. Ex.P.39 is the notarized copy of conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.40 are the challans for payment of conversion charge by claimant No.1. Ex.P.41 and 42 are the tax paid receipt in the name of claimant No.9. Ex.P.43 and 44 are the demand register extracts for the year 1986-87 issued by the Group Panchayathi, Byatarayanapura. It is mentioned that claimant No.9 is the owner of property No.28 in 313. Ex.P.45 is the notarised copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA- RES).
.43. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.5 and documents produced by her. It is noticed that other claimants 40 LAC No 147/2002 and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.5 and documentary evidence produced by her. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.9 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.9 has proved that the claimant No.1 sold site No.28 in her favour through registered sale deed dated 22.02.1986 (Ex.P.36). She further proved that, she was the owner and possession of site No.28 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.9 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.28 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 9 in the affirmative.
41
LAC No 147/2002 .44. Point No.10 :- PW.6 Sujatha W/o D.G. Jagannath Rao deposed by way of filing affidavit. She is claimant No. 10 of this case. She has deposed that, she is the bonafide purchaser of site No.38 measuring 30 X 40 feet, in Sy.No. 15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through registered sale deed dated 20.10.1986. She is the owner and in possession of the above said site. She further deposed that the Deputy Commissioner, has passed an order and converted the acquired land into non-agricultural residential purpose. The conversion fees of Rs.61,019/- was paid and conversion certificate issued on 29.01.1986. She purchased the site in the said conversion land for the purpose of constructing the residential houses. Her name entered in the records and she is paying tax.
.45. She further deposed that without her knowledge and notice, the respondents 1 to 3 have acquired the land and issued preliminary notification in the name of Smt. Nanjamma w/o Chikkavenkatappa. She further deposed that the said Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold the sites in the acquired land and lost her 42 LAC No 147/2002 right and title over the said land. She further deposed that the acquisition proceedings have been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in various Writ Petitions. They have impleaded themselves in L.A.C. No. 147/2002 for claiming compensation. The S.L.A.O., has acquired the lands without mentioning their names and they have deprived the acquisition proceedings. She is entitle to receive the compensation amount in-respect of the site purchased by her.
.46. To prove her case, the claimant No. 10 has produced sale deed dated 20.10.1986 and got marked Ex.P.46. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma sold site No. 38 in favour of claimant No.10 for a consideration of Rs.10,000/-. Possession of the said property handed over to the claimant No.10. Ex.P.47 is notarized copy of official memorandum dated 23.01.1996 of conversion order in respect of acquired land from agricultural into non-agricultural residential purposes. Ex.P.48 is the notice dated 28.10.1985 issued by Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru District to the claimant No.1 for payment of conversion charge. Ex.P.49 is the notarized copy of 43 LAC No 147/2002 conversion sanction certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Bengaluru North Taluka on 29.01.1986. Ex.P.50 are the challans for payment of conversion charge by claimant No.1. Ex.P.51 is tax paid receipt in the name of claimant No.10. Ex.P.52 is the demand register extract for the year 1986-87 issued by the Group Panchayathi, Byatarayanapura. It is mentioned that claimant No.10 is the owner of property No.38. Ex.P.45 is the notarized copy of order dated 24.08.2005 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No.26358/2002 (LA-RES).
.47. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.6 and documents produced by her. It is noticed that other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.6 and documentary evidence produced by her. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.10 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.10 has 44 LAC No 147/2002 proved that the claimant No.1 sold site No.38 in her favour through registered sale deed dated 20.10.1986 (Ex.P.46). She further proved that, she was the owner and possession of site No.38 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.10 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.38 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 10 in the affirmative.
.48. POINT No.11: To prove his case, the claimant No.11 C. Jagadish S/o late. Chikkabalappa has not adduced oral evidence and produced documents. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.11 has not proved his title over the acquired land. Hence, he is not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in the acquired land in question bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas 45 LAC No 147/2002 situated at Bytarayanapura Village. Therefore, I answer point No.11 in the negative.
.49. POINT No.12: To prove his case, the claimant No.12 Bolappa S/o Nanjanna has filed evidence affidavit (Examination- in-chief) on 21.12.2009. He has stated that, he, other Lrs of claimant No.1 and GPA holders (claimant No.2 and his son - Nandakumar) having equal proportionate share in the compensation deposited in this court. But he has not produced any documents and got marked in evidence. He also not tendered for cross-examination. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.12 has not proved his title over the acquired land. Hence, he is not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in the acquired land in question bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Bytarayanapura Village. Therefore, I answer point No.12 in the negative.
.50. Point No.13:- PW.9 N. Jayashankar S/o late. B.M. Narayanappa deposed by way of filing affidavit. He is claimant No. 13 of this case. He has deposed that, he is the bonafide purchaser of site No. 24 measuring 30 X 40 feet, in Sy.No. 15/3 of 46 LAC No 147/2002 Byatarayanapura village, from one Shivaram Shetty through sale deed dated 27.06.1989. He further stated that, said Shivaram Shetty purchased the said site from claimant No.1 Smt. Nanjamma for valuable consideration through sale deed dated 22.08.1986. He further stated that he has constructed the RCC roof in the said site by spending more than Rs.15,00,000/-, and he was residing in the said house along with family members. He was the owner and in possession of the above said property. He further stated that in collusion with the Revenue Authority, the respondent illegally and forcibly demolished entire building and acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 including his property.
.51. To prove his case, the claimant No. 13 has produced sale deed dated 22.08.1986 and got marked Ex.P.77. The recitals of sale deed discloses that the claimant No. 1 Smt. Nanjamma sold site No.24 measuring 30 X 40 feet in favour Shivaram Shetty s/o Rama Shetty. He has produced another sale deed dated 27.06.1989 executed by Shivarama Shetty in his favour and got marked as Ex.P.78. This sale deed discloses that the claimant No.13 purchased site No. 24 from Rama Shetty for a consideration of Rs.20,000/- and possession of the site handed over to the 47 LAC No 147/2002 claimant No.13. He has produced tax assessment extract for the year 1988-89 issued by Group Panchayath, Byatarayanapura in respect of site No.24/313 of Byatarayanapura village and got marked as Ex.P.80.
.52. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.9 and documents produced by him. It is noticed that other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.9 and documentary evidence produced by him. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.13 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.13 has proved that the claimant No.1 sold site No.24 in favour of Srivarama Shetty vide sale deed of Ex.P.77. He further proved that as per Ex.P.78 of registered sale deed dated 27.06.1989 (Ex.P.78) he purchased said site from Ramashetty. He further proved that, he was the owner and possession of site No.24 48 LAC No 147/2002 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. He further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.13 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.24 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in the acquired land in question.
.53. PW.9 further deposed that, one B.P. Vargees purchased site No.54 in Sy. No.15/3 of Byatarayanapura village, through sale deed dated 22.08.1986. In turn, he purchased the said site through sale deed dated 18.01.1983 from B.P. Vargees. Since he was in possession of the said property and paying tax. He further stated that he has constructed the RCC roof in the said site by spending more than Rs.15,00,000/-, and he was residing in the said house along with family members. Hence, he prayed for apportion the compensation in respect of Site No.54 measuring 30 X 40 feet, situated at Byatarayanapura village. 49
LAC No 147/2002 .54. The claimant No. 13 has produced sale deed dated 22.08.1986 and got marked Ex.P.79. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No. 1 Smt. Nanjamma sold site No.54 measuring 30 X 40 feet in favour of Sri. B.P. Vargees S/o P.G. Vargees. He has produced another sale deed dated 18.01.1983 executed by B.P. Vargees in his favour and got marked as Ex.P.81. This sale deed discloses that the claimant No.13 purchased site No. 54 from B.P. Vargees for a consideration of Rs.50,000/- and possession of the site handed over to the claimant No.13. I have carefully perused the recitals of Ex.P.81 of sale deed (end of the para 4) which reads follows:
ಈ ಕಕಯದ ಸಸತತನ ಬಗಗಗ ನಗರ ಭಭ ಪರಮತ ಜಲಲಲಧಕಲರ ಬಗಬಗಳಳರರ (ಕರಮಲರ ಪಲರರ ಪಶಶಮದ ಕಚಗಚರ ) ರವರಬದ ದನಲಬಕ 09.06.1986 ರಲಭಲ ಕಗಚಸನಬ. ಯರ ಎಲಸ (ಎ) (61) .85.86 ರ ಮಭಲಕ ಕಗಚಸಕಟಟಳಗ ನಡಗದರ ಈ ಸಸತತನ ಬಗಗಗ ವನಲಯತ ಮತರತ ಬಗಬಗಳಳರರ ನಗರ ಅಭವವದದ ಮಬಡಳಯಬದ ದನಲಬಕ 11.02.1985 ರಬದರ ನಬ. ಬಡಎ . ಎಲಎ ಯರ. ಎಲಎ 2.15.1984 -
85, ಸರಗರ ನಬ. 15/3 ಬಲಬಟರಲಯನಪಪರ ಜಮಚನರ ಬಗಗಗ ಯಲವ ಅಕಗಸಚರ ಸಬಬಬಧವಲಲರಗಬದಭ ಲಗಟರ ಸಹತ ಕಗಭಟಟರರತತದಗ.
.55. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.9 and documents produced by him. As per the sale deeds produced by him, it is clear that he has purchased the site No.54 formed in Sy. No.15/3 of Dasarahalli village. But as mentioned in the sale deed 50 LAC No 147/2002 of claimant No.13 (Ex.P.81), site No.54 not coming under the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 of Dasarahalli village. It is further mentioned that the site No.54 in Sy. No.15/3 of Byatarayanapura village is not relating to the acquisition proceedings. I am of the opinion that, as per the recitals in the sale deed of Ex.P.81, site No.54 not relates to the acquisiton proceedings of this case. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.13 is not entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.54 measuring 30 X 40 feet as mentioned in sale deed of Ex.P.81. Accordingly, I answer point No. 13 in the partly affirmative.
.56. Point No.14:- PW.10 N. Jayashankar s/o late. B.M. Narayanappa deposed by way of filing affidavit. He is the husband and GPA holder of claimant No. 13 Smt. B. Saroja. He has deposed that, one Smt. Nanjamma is owner of the land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acred 32 guntas situted at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said land into residential site. He further deposed that his wife B.Saroja purchased site No.19 measuring 30 X 40 feet from Smt. Nanjamma. She constructed RCC roof house and residing in the said house. Her name got 51 LAC No 147/2002 entered in the records of village panchayath, Byatarayanapura. He further stated that in collusion with the Revenue Authority, the respondent illegally and forcibly demolished entire building and acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 including his property. Hence, he prayed for to apportion the compensation to the site and building of claimant No.14.
.57. To prove her case, the claimant No. 14 has produced SPA dated 21.08.2012 executed by her in favour of PW.10 for deposing evidence on her behalf in the present case. She has produced sale deed dated 22.08.1986 and got marked Ex.P.83. The recital of sale deed discloses that the claimant No. 1 Smt. Nanjamma (claimant No.1) sold site No.19 measuring 30 X 40 feet in favour claimant No.14 for a consideration of Rs.10,000/-. Possession of the property handed over to the claimant No.14. She has produced tax assessment extract for the year 1986-87 and got marked as Ex.P.84. It is mentioned that claimant No.14 is owner of the property No.19 out of 313 of Byatarayanapura village.
52
LAC No 147/2002 .58. I have carefully perused the oral evidence of PW.10 and documents produced by the claimant No.14. Other claimants and respondent have not all challenged the oral testimony of PW.10 and documentary evidence. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.14 has proved that the claimant No.1 -Smt. Nanjamma was the owner and in possession of the acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acre 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She got converted the said agricultural land into non-agricultural residential purposes, she formed sites and sold to the several persons. Claimant No.14 has proved that the claimant No.1 sold site No.19 in her favour through registered sale deed dated 22.08.1986 (Ex.P.83). She further proved that, she was the owner and possession of site No.19 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land bearing Sy.No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village. She further proved that in view of sale of sites, the original owner - claimant No.1 has lost his right over the said property. Hence, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.14 is entitle to receive the compensation deposited in this case in respect of site No.19 53 LAC No 147/2002 measuring 30 X 40 feet formed in acquired land in question. Accordingly, I answer point No. 14 in the affirmative.
.59. POINT No.15: To prove his case, the claimant No.15 Smt Nagarathna N. Bhat W/o Mahalinga Bhat has not adduced oral evidence and produced documents. Therefore, I come to the conclusion that, the claimant No.12 has not proved his title over the acquired land. Hence, she is not entitle to receive the compensation amount with accrued interest in the acquired land in question bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Bytarayanapura Village. Therefore, I answer point No.15 in the negative.
.60. POINT NO.16: In view of my finding on the afore-mentioned point No.1 to 15, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The reference made by the respondent /S.L.A.O. under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is hereby partly allowed.
The claimant No.3 - B. Janardhan S/o Gangojirao is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.31 and 32 measuring 30x40 feet each, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 54 LAC No 147/2002 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.4 - B. Sanjivrao S/o late. B. Sriramulu is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.37 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.5 - T. Siddagangamma W/o Mutturayappa is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.55 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The prayer of the claimant No.5 T. Siddagangamma W/o Mutturayappa in respect of site No. 56 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy.
No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon is rejected.
The claimant No.7 - D. Seenashetty S/o Koragappa is not entitle to receive the compensation 55 LAC No 147/2002 amount in respect of site No.23 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.8 - C. Shashidhara S/o D. N. Channabasappa is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.50 and 51 measuring 30x40 feet each, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.9 - Brundavathi D/o Doddalingaiah is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.28measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.10 - Smt. Sujatha W/o D.G. Jagannathrao is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.38 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
56
LAC No 147/2002 The claimant No.13 - N. Jayashankar S/o late. B.M. Narayanappa is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.24 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The prayer of the claimant No.13 N. Jayashankar S/o late. B.M. Narayanappa in respect of site No. 54 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon is rejected.
The claimant No.14 - B. Saroja W/o N. Jayashankar is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.19 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant Nos.3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13 and 14 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. 57
LAC No 147/2002 The reference made by the respondent /S.L.A.O. under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect of claimant No.1, 2, 6, 11, 12, and 15 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 15th day of October, 2019.) (R.Y. Shashidhara), II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR CLAIMANTS:
P.W.1 : Smt. T. Siddagangamma
PW.2 : G. Janardhan
PW.3 : D. Seenashetty
PW.4 : B. Sanjeevarao
PW.5 : Smt. Brundavathi
PW.6 : Smt. Sujatha
PW.7 : C. Shashidhara
PW.8 : K.A. Nandakumar
PW.9 :N. Jayashankar
PW.10 : N. Jayashankar
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE CLAIMANTS:
Ex.P.1 : Sale deed dated 24.11.1986
58
LAC No 147/2002
Ex.P.2 :Sale deed dated 21.12.1992
Ex.P.3 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.4 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.5 : Notarised copy of two challans
Ex.P.6 : Notarised copy of coversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
Ex.P.7 :Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.8 : Notarised copy of sale deed
dated 13.09.2002
Ex.P.9 : Notarised copy of sale deed
dated 10.04.2003
Ex.P.10 : Notarised copy of sale deed
dated 09.01.2005
Ex.P.11 : Sale deed dated 16.03.1987
Ex.P.12 :Sale deed dated 14.08.1986
Ex.P.13 :Sale deed dated 14.08.1986
Ex.P.14 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.15 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.16 : Notarised copy of conversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
Ex.P.17&18 : Two tax assessment extracts
59
LAC No 147/2002
Ex.P.19 : Tax paid receipt
Ex.P.20 :Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.21 : Sale deed dated 20.10.1986
Ex.P.22 :Tax paid receipt
Ex.P.23 : Tax assessment extracts
Ex.P.24 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.25 : Notarised copy of challans
Ex.P26 : Notarised copy of conversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
Ex.P.27 :Tax assessment extract
Ex.P.28 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.29 : Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.30 : Sale deed dated 24.11.1986
Ex.P.31 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.32 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.33 : Notarised copy of two challans
Ex.P.34 : Notarised copy of conversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
60
LAC No 147/2002
Ex.P.35 :Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.36 : Sale deed dated 22.08.1986
Ex.P.37 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.38 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.39 : Notarised copy of conversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
Ex.P.40 : Notarized copy of challan
Ex.P.41 & 42 : Two Tax paid receipts
Ex.P.43 & 43 : Two tax assessment extracts
Ex.P.45 :Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.46 : Sale deed dated 20.10.1986
Ex.P.47 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.48 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.49 : Notarised copy of conversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
Ex.P.50 : Notarised copy of challans
Ex.P.51 : Tax paid receipts
Ex.P.52 : Tax assessment extract
61
LAC No 147/2002
Ex.P.53 :Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.54 : Annexure VIII issued by Sub
Registrar, Byatarayanapura
Ex.P.55 : Sale deed dated 01.12.1987
Ex.P.56 : Notarised copy of official
memorandum dated 23.01.1986
Ex.P.57 : Notarised copy of notice dated
28.10.1985
Ex.P.58 : Notarised copy of conversion
sanction certificate dated 29.01.1986
Ex.P.59 : Notarised copy of challans
Ex.P.60 :Notarised copy of order passed
in W.P. No.26358/2002
Ex.P.61 : Annexjure VIII issued by Sub
Registrar, Byatarayanapura
Ex.P.62 : Agreement of sale dated 11.05.1985
Ex.P.62(a) : Typed copy of Ex.P.62
Ex.P.63 : Irrevocable power of attorney
Ex.P.64 : General Power of attorney
Ex.P.65 : Official memorandum dated
23.01.1986
Ex.P.66 : Conversion sanction
certificate dated 29.01.1986
62
LAC No 147/2002
Ex.P.67 : Notice dated 28.10.1985
Ex.P.68 & 69 : Two challans
Ex.P.70 : Sale deed dated 05.05.1988
Ex.P.71 : Sale advance agreement dated
17.10.1995
Ex.P.72 : Notarised copy of sale deed
dated 07.06.2001
Ex.P.73 :Notarised copy of sale deed
dated 0.04.2003
Ex.P.74 : Certified copy of sale deed dated
11.06.2007
Ex.P.75 : Certified copy of sale deed dated
19.01.2005
Ex.P.76 : Death certificate of K.C.
Ashwath
Ex.P.77 : Sale deed dated 22.08.1986
Ex.P.78 : Sale deed dated 27.06.1989
Ex.P.79 : Sale deed dated 22.08.1986
Ex.P.80 : Tax assessment extract
Ex.P.81 : Sale deed dated 18.01.1993
Ex.P.82 : SPA dated 21.08.2012
Ex.P.83 : Sale deed dated 22.08.1986
Ex.P.84 : Tax assessment extract
63
LAC No 147/2002
3. WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
Nil
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
Nil (R.Y. Shashidhara), II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge, Bengaluru.Digitally signed by RACHENAHALLI Y SHASHIDHARA
RACHENAHALLI Y DN: cn=RACHENAHALLI Y SHASHIDHARA,ou=HIGH COURT OF SHASHIDHARA KARNATAKA,o=GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,st=Karnataka,c=IN Date: 2019.10.20 13:35:38 IST 64 LAC No 147/2002 ORDER
The reference made by the respondent /S.L.A.O. under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is hereby partly allowed.
The claimant No.3 - B. Janardhan S/o Gangojirao is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.31 and 32 measuring 30x40 feet each, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.4 - B. Sanjivrao S/o late. B. Sriramulu is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.37 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.5 - T. Siddagangamma W/o Mutturayappa is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.55 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka 65 LAC No 147/2002 Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The prayer of the claimant No.5 T. Siddagangamma W/o Mutturayappa in respect of site No. 56 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy.
No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon is rejected.
The claimant No.7 - D. Seenashetty S/o Koragappa is not entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.23 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.8 - C. Shashidhara S/o D. N. Channabasappa is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.50 and 51 measuring 30x40 feet each, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.9 - Brundavathi D/o Doddalingaiah is entitle to receive the compensation 66 LAC No 147/2002 amount in respect of site No.28measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.10 - Smt. Sujatha W/o D.G. Jagannathrao is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.38 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant No.13 - N. Jayashankar S/o late. B.M. Narayanappa is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.24 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The prayer of the claimant No.13 N. Jayashankar S/o late. B.M. Narayanappa in respect of site No. 54 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon is rejected.
67
LAC No 147/2002
The claimant No.14 - B. Saroja W/o N.
Jayashankar is entitle to receive the compensation amount in respect of site No.19 measuring 30x40 feet, out of acquired land bearing Sy. No.15/3 measuring 2 acres 32 guntas situated at Byatarayanapura village, Yalahanka Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk, in this reference along with accrued interest thereon.
The claimant Nos.3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13 and 14 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 respondent /S.L.A.O. under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect of claimant No.1, 2, 6, 11, 12, and 15 is hereby rejected.
Draw award accordingly.
(Vide separate Judgment) (R.Y. Shashidhara), II Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge & Spl. Judge, Bengaluru.