B PATIL SHIDAGOUDA Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS in all these twenty civil Revision Petitions, being aggrieved by a portion of the order dated 28-2-2008 passed in Execution Nos. 72/04, 73/04, 74/04, 75/04, 76/04, 71/04, 77/04, 78/04, 79/04, 80/04, 81/04, 83/04, 84/04, 85/04, 86/04, 87/04, 88/04, 89/04 and 90/04 on the file of the learned civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and JMFC, Athani, belgaum District, have presented the instant revision Petitions.

(2.) IN all these 20 cases, the petitioners herein contended that, the respondent has taken the possession of their lands as early as on 25-3-1973 before issuing preliminary notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land acquisition Act (hereinafter called as 'act' ). The competent authority under the Land acquisition Act has issued preliminary Notification under section 4 (1) of the Act and the same was published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 3-1-1985. The award has been passed by the special Land Acquisition Officer on 27-3-1989. Not being satisfied with the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition officer and on the ground that, the compensation awarded is inadequate, petitioners were constrained to file the application under section 18 of the Act for reference to the jurisdictional Court for enhancement of compensation. The jurisdictional civil Court, after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and other relevant material available on file, has enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs. 54,000/ per acre. Not satisfied with the enhanced amount by the reference Court, all these petitioners who are the landowners, have filed Miscellaneous First Appeals before this Court. This Court, after hearing both the parties and after re-appreciating the documentary evidence and taking into consideration the purpose for which the lands were notified and acquired, has allowed the appeals and further enhanced the market value at the rate of Rs. 70,000/- per acre. Therefore, petitioners have contended that, the judgment and award passed by this Court are binding and conclusive. The further case of the petitioners is that, they have filed the Execution Petition nos. 72/04, 73/04, 74/04, 75/04, 76/04, 71/04, 77/04, 78/04, 79/04, 80/04, 81/04, 82/04, 83/04, 84/04, 85/04, 86/04, 87/04, 88/04, 89/04 and 90/04 for executing the said judgment and award passed by this Court in Miscellaneous First appeals respectively, contending specifically that the benefits as envisaged under the land Acquisition Act have not been extended from the date of taking possession of the land in question before issuing 4 (1) Notification (for the period between taking possession of the lands and the issuance of 4 (1) Notification ). The execution petitions filed by the petitioners had come up for consideration before the Court of Civil judge (Sr. Dn.), Athani, The Court below allowed the said petitions and directed the respondent to pay the arrears of compensation to the petitioners as per the judgment and award passed by this Court with statutory benefits from the date of 4 (1) Notification to the date of award and interest on 30% solatium and 12% additional market value as per the decision of the Apex Court in the case of 'smt. Channarajamanni v. Union of India and others' reported in 2004 AIR SCW 1629 relied upon in the case of 'm. Gangappa v. The d. C. , Shimoga and others' reported in ILR 2004 Kar 4397 : (2004 AIR Kant HCR 3179 ). But the Execution Court has not extended the benefits as provided under the statute, to the petitioners/ land owners from the date of 25-3-1973 to 2-1-1985 (from the date of taking possession till the date of issuing preliminary notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act)and it is in relation to this denial that the petitioners are before this Court in these revision petitions.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government pleader appearing for the respondent for considerable length of time.