SPECIAL LAND Vs. S V ERAJU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated 11/11/2011 passed in LAC No.77/2011, by the Senior Civil Judge, Maddur, has presented this appeal, on the ground that, the market value fixed by the Reference Court at Rs.250/ - per Sq.Ft. with all statutory benefits under Section 23 of L.A. Act, is on higher side and is liable to be reduced.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are: lands in Sy.Nos.416/2 measuring 02 guntas, 416/1 measuring 3 guntas, 391/3 measuring 1 gunta, 384/4 measuring 2 guntas and 384 measuring 6 guntas in all 14 guntas, situated at Chamanahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Maddur Taluk belonging to the claimant has been notified and acquired by the appellant for the benefit of 2nd respondent herein, for the purpose of formation of 4 lane Bangalore -Mysore High way vide Preliminary Notification dated 24.1.2003 issued under Section 4(1) of L.A.Act, followed by Final Notification dated 13.4.2003 issued under Section 6(1) of L.A.Act. Thereafter, the Spl. Land Acquisition Officer, after issuing notices under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act, calling objections and claim petition, has passed the award on 6.12.2003, fixing the market value at Rs.52/ - per Sq.Ft. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, the claimant has filed an application under Section 18(1) of L.A. Act, seeking enhancement of compensation, with a request to refer the same to the jurisdictional Court. Accordingly, the said application was referred to the Senior Civil Judge, Maddur and numbered as LAC No.77/2011. The Reference Court, after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file, and having regard to the nature and potentiality of the lands in question and the purpose for which they have been notified and acquired, has allowed the said petition and fixed the market value at Rs250/ - per sq.ft with all statutory benefits as envisaged under Section 23 of L.A.Act. The said enhancement made by the Reference Court is on higher side and is liable to be reduced the appellant has presented this appeal.

(3.) WE have heard learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for appellants.