SPECIAL LAND ACQISITION OFFICER Vs. A L NANJAREDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C. R. P. Nos. 831, 809, 58, 538 of 2005 are filed by the same petitioners namely the Bangalore Development authority (hereinafter referred to as 'bda' for short)challenging the correctness of the respective orders dated 15-9-2005; 16-9-2005; 26-11-2004 and 11-3-2005 passed respectively in the execution Case Nos. 1324/04; 361/03; 294/91 and 699/2002 on the file of the learned 2nd additional City Civil Judge (sitting in CCH no. 17), Bangalore. C. R. P. No. 1059 of 2005 is filed by the claimants in LAC No. 227/89 aggrieved by the order dated 28-10-2005 passed in Execution Case No. 2490/2004 on the file of the same Court. The Petitioners in this CRP No. 1059/2004 and also the respective respondents in other 4 CRPs are the claimants respectively in LAC Nos. 227/89, 152/1988, 157/1988, 254/1984 and 665/1983. These claimants obtained from the Reference court namely the Court of learned II Addl. C ity Civil Judge (CCH No. 17), Bangalore, the respective awards in the said cases in respect of the lands acquired for BDA. These claimants filed their respective Execution cases before the said Court of the learned 2nd additional City Civil Judge (hereinafter referred to as "execution Court" for short)seeking execution of the awards obtained by them in their respective Land Acquisition Cases. In last of such Execution Cases filed by the respective claimants in the said Land acquisition cases, except in Ex. Case No. 2490/04, the Execution Court, by passing the respective orders impugned herein, directed BDA to pay to the claimant-Decree Holders therein, interest on solatium and additional market value also. Therefore the judgment-Debtor bda has challenged the said orders in CRP nos. 831, 809,58 and 538 of 2005. The claimant-Decree Holder in Execution case No. 2490/04 has challenged in his crp No. 1059/05, the correctness of the calculation memo accepted by the execution Court by passing the impugned order.

(2.) IN all these revision petitions, the same questions of fact and law are involved in re gard to the entitlement of the claimants in the respective land acquisition cases to the interest on solatium and additional market value components of compensation and the method of calculation to be adopted in arriving at the exact amount of compensation due to the claimants by the judgment Debtor-BDA. Therefore all these five Civil Revision petitions are disposed of by this common order.

(3.) STATED in brief, the facts leading to each of these Civil Revision Petitions (for short "crps") are as under : (i) The respondent-Claimant in CRP No. 831/2005 filed his First Execution Case No. 1379/2000 seeking execution of the award dated 4-9-1999 passed in LAC No. 152/1988. (ii) The respondent-claimant in CRP No. 809/2005 filed his first Execution Case No. 779/98 seeking execution of the award in LAC no. 157/1989 dated 19-2-1998 claiming interest on both the solatium and additional market value. (iii) The respondent-claimant in CRP 58/2005 filed his first and second Execution petitions respectively in Execution Case Nos. 235/1986 and 42/1987 seeking recovery of the compensation from the JDR. BDA in terms of the award dated 31-7-1985 passed in LAC no. 254/1984 and both the said cases came to be dismissed as withdrawn respectively by orders dated 22-2-1986 and 11-7-1988. Thereafter he filed his 3rd Ex. Case No. 294/1991. While closing his 3rd Ex. Case, without calculating interest on the amounts of solatium and additional market value, the excess amount of deposit that was made by the JDR. BDA was ordered to be deposited with Canara Bank. (iv) The respondent-claimant in CRP 538/2005 filed his earlier 3 execution petitions in execution Case Nos. 280/1986 (DD 10-9-1986); 1061/1991 (DD 5-4-1993) and 621/1993 (DD 13-10-1995) and the said cases came to be closed after the judgment debtor bda deposited certain amounts in each of them. However, the third Execution Case (No. 621/1993) came to be closed as 'fully satisfied'. Thereafter the claimant filed his subsequent execution case No. 699/2002 claiming balance amount of compensation including interest both on solatium and also additional market value. (v) CRP No. 1059/2005; is filed by the claimant-decree holder in LAC No. 227/1989 challenging the correctness of the order dated 28-10-2005 passed in his Execution case No. 2490/2004 that was filed by him claiming balance or compensation including interest on solatium and Additional market value as per award dated 22-11-1994 passed in the said land acquisition case. Earlier to the filing of the said Execution Case No. 2490/04, the claaimant-decree holder had filed his first execution case No. 193/1998.