EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Vs. S.N. JAYARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals by the State- Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Kolar and by the claimant are directed against the same judgment and award dated 28/07/2012 passed in LAC.NO.2/2003, by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Chintamani, sitting at Sidlaghatta.

(2.) The Reference Court, by its judgment and award, has enhanced compensation in respect of the lands in question at Rs.41,79,000/- for six acres, with all statutory benefits as envisaged under L.A. Act. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the State has filed an appeal contending that the compensation awarded by the Reference Court is on higher side and is liable to be reduced and the claimant has filed an appeal contending that the Reference Court has erred in not awarding any compensation towards loss of crops from 1.4.1963 to 25.6.2001 and therefore, it is liable to be awarded.

(3.) The undisputed facts of the case are: Claimant is the owner cum kathedar of the land bearing Sy.Nos.64/3 and 66 of Neralamaradahalli village, Sadali Hobli, Sidlaghatta Taluk. It has been notified and acquired by the State on account of submergence as the tank bund of Sadali new tank of Sadali village came to be raised, vide Preliminary Notification dated 22.12.1999 issued under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, followed by Final Notification dated 10.7.2001 issued under Section 6(1) of the Act. Thereafter, notices under Sections 9 and 10 were issued inviting objections and claim from the notified kathedars and the Land Acquisition Officer has passed the award on 22.6.2002, fixing the market value at Rs.50,000/- per acre. Being not satisfied with the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimant has filed an application under Section 18(1) of L.A. Act seeking enhancement and requested the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter to the jurisdictional Reference Court. Accordingly, it has been referred to Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Chinthamani and numbered as LAC No.2/2003. The said matter had come up for consideration before the Reference Court on 28/7/2012. The Reference Court, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other materials available on file, taking into consideration the purpose for which it has been notified and acquired, has allowed the same in part and enhanced the market value at Rs.72,000/- per acre vide order dated 4.4.2009. Against which, claimant has preferred M.F.A.No.7606/2009 before this Court, which was allowed and the matter was remitted back to the Reference Court with a direction to reconsider and pass appropriate order in accordance with relevant provisions of L.A. Act by giving opportunity of hearing to the both counsel. Thereafter, the matter had come up before the Reference Court on 28/7/2012. The Reference Court, after hearing both the parties and after perusing the materials available on file and in compliance of the directions issued by this Court, taking into consideration the value of the site measuring 60 x 60 ft. on the basis of Ex.P1, sale deed and the report of the commissioner and after assigning valid reasons in para-15 of its judgment, has determined the compensation at Rs.8,71,200/- and after deducting 20% towards development charges, has determined the compensation at Rs.41,79,200/- for six acres with all statutory benefits as envisaged under Section 23 of L.A. Act. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the State and the claimant have presented these appeals.