SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER K.R. PROJECT, PARAKALAMATA BUILDING MYSORE-570001 Vs. BASAVAEGOWDA S/O DASEGOWDA @ DASA @ KUNTEGOWDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is preferred by the Government, challenging the judgment and award dated 6th September 2011 in LAC.A. No. 544 of 2011 passed by the III Additional District Judge at Mysore. It is also sought for setting aside the judgment and award dated 10th August 2010 passed by the I Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Mysore in LAC No. 136 of 2009. The learned Government Advocate submits that the Reference Court has committed an error in passing the award on par with the judgment and award passed in LAC No. 755 of 2007. He submits, that there is no proximity between the land in question and the land, which is the subject matter in the appeal referred to above. He further submits that the sale receipts, which was taken into account, is also different from that of the land, which is the subject matter of this appeal and also of the land in the order passed in LAC No. 755 of 2007. Further, it is submitted that in the instant case, 4(1) notification was issued on 3rd March 2005; 6(1) notification was issued on 13th April 2006 and the award was passed on 23rd July 2007 and the land was acquired for the purpose of 'Varuna Canal'. The Land Acquisition Officer has awarded compensation of Rs. 35,000/ - per acre and the same came to be enhanced to Rs. 3,94,500/ - per acre, by the Reference Court by its order dated 10th August 2010. He submits that the enhancement of the award amount by the Reference Court is arbitrary without there being any reasons and materials.

(2.) THE submissions of the learned Government Advocate are examined in the light of the order passed by the Reference Court. It is not in dispute that land measuring in an extent of 8 guntas in Survey No. 258/2 of Marballi village, Jayapura Hobli, Mysore Taluk, was acquired for the purpose of 'Varuna Canal'. The Reference Court, taking into consideration the potentiality of the land and sale receipts and also considering the compensation awarded to the lands in the adjoining village, which were the subject matter in LAC No. 755 of 2007 referred to above, having awarded the compensation of Rs. 3,94,500/ - per acre, then it is for the Reference Court to assess and award the compensation and there cannot be any discrimination. These aspects are rightly looked into by the Reference Court while awarding the compensation. Under these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the Reference Court, which is confirmed in appeal. Accordingly, I am not inclined to issue notice and the appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission itself.