TADINARAYANA SETTY Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts of the case leading up to and relevant for the disposal of this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows. The Appellant purchased Survey No. 19 of Jakkasandra village, Bangalore North Taluk, in the year 1935 and after paying the requisite fine for converting the same into building sites secured the necessary sanction of the Government on 20-10-39. The Appellant next applied to the Bangalore Municipality for the sanction of a private lay out on 24-2-1940 and obtained the sanction on 31-3-1944. Portions of this land before its conversion as building sites were acquired by the Government for the purpose of putting up a maternity home and a school in 1937 and 1939 respectively. The Appellant after the conversion of the land into building sites, applied to the Municipality for a licence for putting up a building and constructed a house on a portion of the land and leased out the same on a rent of Rs. 50/- per month. Later he sold several sites at rates varying from Rs. 6-8-0 to Rs. 15/- per sq. yd. in the year 1945. Preliminary notification for the acquisition of this land was published in the Mysore Gazette on 11-10-1945 and final notification on 30-5-1946. The Appellant objected to the acquisition on various grounds detailed in Ex. 11, the most important of them being, (1) that the land was un-suited for the purpose of a maternity hospital as the same was adjacent to the Mysore Maharaja Weaving Mills and the Labour Colony and (2) that the acquisition would be uneconomical inasmuch as the land proposed to be acquired was not agricultural land but a building site and compensation for its compulsory acquisition will have to be paid for at a high rate. The objections of the Appellant were overruled and possession of the land was taken on 7-5-1947 by the Municipal Engineer after the order for its acquisition on 1-5-1947.

(2.) The Appellant claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 15/- per Sq. yd. but the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. yd. The Land Acquisition Officer set off a sum of Rs. 98,807/- against the amount of compensation to be paid to the Appellant on the ground that the said sum was required for laying out roads and drains and for the installation of electric power. He disallowed the claim of the Appellant for compensation for the building put up by him on the ground that the same must have been constructed after the date of the preliminary notification and without the requisite licence from the Municipality. The Land Acquisition Officer also excluded an area of 26248 sq. yds. from the award of compensation (the total area of the land acquired being 484041/3 sq. yds.) on the ground that the said area was required for laying out roads and drains. He left out of account an area of about 3000 sq. yds. on the ground that the same formed a hollow or 'halla' unfit for building or for any other purpose. The Appellant' prayed for a reference to the District Judge, Bangalore. He claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 15/- per sq. yd., disputed the validity and correctness of the Land Acquisition Officer's decision disallowing compensation for an area of 26248 sq. yds. of land and for the house as also for the 'halla' etc.

(3.) The District Judge upheld the rate of compensation at Rs. 10/- per sq. yd. awarded by tne Land Acquisition Officer as also his decision dis-allowing compensation for 26248 sq. yds. He also upheld the decision of the Land Acquisition Officer disallowing compensation for the building put up by the Appellant. He however allowed compensation at the rate of Rs. 3/- per sq. yd. for an area of about 3000 sq. yds. which had been left out of account by the Land Acquisition Officer. He also upheld the claim of the Appellant for Rs. 10,000/- which had been earmarked by the Land Acquisition Officer towards expenses for installing electric power and directed the said sum to be deducted from out of Rs. 98,807/- the sum directed to be set off against the compensation payable to the Appellant. Hence this present appeal.