HOLIYAPPA AND ORS. Vs. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in the above said cases claiming to be the owners of the lands as detai led in the following table :

(2.) Being not satisf ied with the said award, reference appl ications have been made by the claimants and the same came to be referred to the Senior Civi l Judge and J.M.F.C., Badami for determination of the compensation. In-fact in L.A.C.No.58 of 2012 clubbed with L.A.C.No.59 of 2012 the learned Senior Civi l Judge considered the claim of the appellant in M.F.A.No.101087 of 2014 Mr.Hol iyappa and also considered the claim of one Ningappa who is appellant in M.F.A.No.101049 of 2014 claimant in L.A.C.No.29 of 2009, as well considered the claim of the appellant in M.F.A.No.101050 of 2014 Pundal ikappa claimant in L.A.C.No.28 of 2009 and after recording the evidence and hearing the arguments on merits in those land acquisition cases, ultimately the learned Senior Civi l Judge enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.1,60,000/- so far as irrigated lands are concerned and Rs.67,200/- per acre so far as dry lands are concerned. Though the claimants/ appellants herein claimed that their lands are irrigated lands, but the Senior Civi l Judge has accepted the bifurcation of the said lands as ordered by the Land Acquisition Off icer, the wet land and irrigated land and enhanced the compensation accordingly. So far as the appellant- Hol iyappa is concerned, it is stated that, he is entitled for compensation to the irrigated land to the extent of 01 acre 30 guntas and entitled compensation for dry land to the extent of 01 acre 10 guntas in Sy.No.5/1, wherein it is stated that the appellant in M.F.A.No.101049 of 2014 Ningappa is concerned, he is entitled for compensation to the extent of 01 acre 35 guntas in Sy.No.7/2B/1 as 01 acre 06 guntas irrigated lands and 01 acre 35 guntas as dry land.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants contended before this Court that, the learned Senior Civi l Judge without giving any reason whatsoever has accepted bifurcation of the said lands into wet and dry lands and awarded compensation separately. Though the land acquisition off icer himself has come to the conclusion that, all the lands are wet lands and they are irrigated by means of channel water. Therefore, he contends that the said defect has to be corrected by this Court.