H.H. MALLIKARJUNAPPA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this court assailing the order passed by the Asst. Commissioner (LAO), Shimoga, dated 15.2.2013, impugned at Annexure -K to the petition. Consequent thereto the petitioner is seeking for issue of mandamus to direct the Asst. Commissioner(LAO) to refer the matter u/s. 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act to the Senior Civil Judge, Shimoga, so as to determine the market value.

(2.) THE petitioner claims to be the owner of the property bearing Sy. No. 3/1 of Malligenahalli village, Shimoga Taluk, measuring 2 acres. The said property is stated to have been acquired by the respondents by issuance of Notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. Subsequent thereto, notice under Sections 9 and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued and ultimately the acquisition has been completed. The issue presently is with regard to the compensation that has been determined and paid to the petitioner and as to whether the petitioner would be entitled to seek for the relief of enhancement of the amount by seeking reference as provided under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The application filed by the petitioner seeking reference has been rejected by the Assistant Commissioner (LAO) by recording in the proceedings dated 5.2.2013 that the compensation paid to the petitioner is under a consent award and therefore, the application cannot be considered.

(3.) IT is contended that even in the case of the petitioner, such compensation by consent had been determined and when part payment of the compensation was made, a security bond had been executed by the petitioner to receive the said amount and an agreement had also been entered. It is therefore contended that when compensation has been determined and paid with the consent of the petitioner, the subsequent application seeking reference for the purpose of seeking enhancement would not arise. Hence, it is contended that the petition is liable to be dismissed.