Dismissed

The Assistant Commissinoer v. Akshay S/O Vishwanath Hampannavar

Karnataka HC4 Sept 2019MFA/102102/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed appeals filed by the Land Acquisition Officer against the Reference Court's enhanced compensation award. The Court held that the acquiring body lacks the right to challenge such awards, as only the beneficiary may be aggrieved.

What did the court decide?

All pending appeals filed by the Land Acquisition Officer were dismissed as not maintainable.

The Assistant Commissinoer Vs Akshay S/O Vishwanath… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2019

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K. NATARAJAN

¶5

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102099/2018 (LAC)

¶6

C/W.

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NOS.102103/2018,

¶8

102100/2018, 102102/2018 & 102104/2018 (LAC)

¶9

MFA NO.102099 OF 2018

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSINOER BAILHONGAL SUB-DIVISION, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI PIN CODE: 591102.

¶12

... APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI. R. RAVINDRA NAIK, HCGP)

¶14

AND:

¶15

MAHAMMAD IQBAL S/O MAHEBOOBSAB HONGAL PA HOLDER OF SUFIYA W/O MAHAMMAD IQBAL HONGAL, R/O: GURLHOSUR SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591213.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER HDMC, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶17

¶18

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DIVISION OFFICE, KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD DIVISION OFFICE, DHARWAD, PIN CODE: 580001. ... RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. K. H. BAGI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1; SRI. G. I. GACHCHINAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R3 - SERVED)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.120/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- PER ACRE.

¶21

MFA NO. 102103 OF 2018

¶22

BETWEEN:

¶23

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSINOER BAILHONGAL SUB-DIVISION, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI PIN CODE: 591102.

¶24

... APPELLANT

¶25

(BY SRI. R. RAVINDRA NAIK, HCGP)

¶26

AND:

¶27

AKSHAY S/O VISHWANATH HAMPANNAVAR R/O: SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591213.

¶28

THE COMMISSIONER HDMC, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶29

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DIVISION OFFICE, KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD, DIVISION OFFICE, DHARWAD PIN CODE: 580001.

¶30

... RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI. K. H. BAGI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶32

¶33

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.124/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- PER ACRE.

¶34

MFA NO.102100 OF 2018

¶35

BETWEEN:

¶36

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSINOER BAILHONGAL SUB-DIVISION, TQ: BAILHONGAL, PIN CODE: 591102.

¶37

... APPELANT

¶38

(BY SRI. R. RAVINDRA NAIK, HCGP)

¶39

AND:

¶40

SMT.TARA @ SUNANDA W/O DATTATREYA RAJAPUROHIT R/O: SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591213.

¶41

THE COMMISSIONER HDMC, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶42

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DIVISION OFFICE, KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD DIVISION OFFICE, DHARWAD, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶43

... RESPONDENTS

¶44

(BY SRI. K. H. BAGI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶45

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.121/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- PER ACRE.

¶46

¶47

MFA NO.102102 OF 2018

¶48

BETWEEN:

¶49

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BAILHONGAL SUB-DIVISION, TQ: BAILHONGAL, PIN CODE: 591102.

¶50

... APPELLANT

¶51

(BY SRI. R. RAVINDRA NAIK, HCGP)

¶52

AND:

¶53

AKSHAY S/O VISHWANATH HAMPANNAVAR R/O: SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591213.

¶54

THE COMMISSIONER HDMC, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶55

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DIVISION OFFICE, KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD DIVISION OFFICE, DHARWAD, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶56

... RESPONDENTS

¶57

(BY SRI. K. H. BAGI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

¶58

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.123/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- PER ACRE.

¶59

¶60

MFA NO. 102104 OF 2018

¶61

BETWEEN:

¶62

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSINOER BAILHONGAL SUB-DIVISION, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI PIN CODE: 591102. ... APPELLANT

¶63

(BY SRI. R. RAVINDRA NAIK, HCGP)

¶64

AND:

¶65

BASAPPA PARAPPA AVAGHADNAVAR R/O: SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591213.

¶66

CHINNAPPA @ BABU S/O SIDDESHWAR HAMPANNAVAR R/O: SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591213.

¶67

THE COMMISSIONER HDMC, HUBBALLI, PIN CODE: 580001.

¶68

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER DIVISION OFFICE, KARNATAKA URBAN WATER SUPPLY AND DRAINAGE BOARD DIVISION OFFICE, DHARWAD, PIN CODE: 580001. ... RESPONDENTS

¶69

(BY SRI. K. H. BAGI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2)

¶70

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO.127/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SAUNDATTI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- PER ACRE.

¶71

¶72

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶73

JUDGMENT

¶74

These appeals are filed by the State Government against the judgment and award dated 22.03.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Saundatti (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Reference Court’ for short), in LAC Nos.120, 124, 121, 123 and 127 of 2013, by urging various grounds for reduction of the compensation awarded by the Reference Court.

¶75

Counsel for the respondents has raised preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the appeals as the land is acquired for the benefit of the Executive Engineer, Division Office, Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board, Dharwad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the KUWSDB’, for short) who is the beneficiary and the respondent herein The Land Acquisition Officer awarded a compensation of

¶76

¶77

Rs.700,000/- per acre to the land losers and reference has been made to the Reference Court and Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.10,00,000/per acre along with all statutory benefits. The Land Acquisition Officer, who has passed the award, filed these appeals challenging the award passed by the Reference Court.

¶78

respondents/claimants vehemently contended that, the beneficiary for whose benefit the land is acquired could be the aggrieved person for challenging the award, but

¶79

not the Land Acquisition Officer who had passed the award prior to Reference. In support of his arguments, learned counsel also placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in MFA No.101928/2014 in the case of

¶80

State of Karnataka, Reptd by Secretary to Govt. and others Vs. Sri. Shivappa Goolappa and

¶81

another , disposed of on 17.07.2015.

¶82

¶83

4. Perused the judgment of this Court in MFA

¶84

No.101928/2014. Para 3 of the said judgment reads as follows:

¶85

“3. The Land Acquisition Officer who has passed the award has no right to challenge the judgment and award passed by the reference Court. It is only the beneficiary for whose benefit the land is acquired could be the aggrieved person and not land acquisition officer in the present appeal. My view is fortified by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer V. Dilip Kumar and others reported in AIR 2011 KAR 820. In view of the same, the appeal filed by the State Government is dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the 2^nd respondent who is a beneficiary to file an appeal, if he so desires in accordance with law.”

¶86

5. Admittedly, the appellant – Land Acquisition

¶87

Officer, had acquired the land for the benefit of the

¶88

¶89

respondent-KUWSDB. Therefore, once the land is acquired by the acquiring body for the benefit of respondent-KUWSDB, who is the beneficiary, the acquiring body cannot challenge the award passed by the Reference Court. Therefore, these appeals filed by acquiring body are not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the respondent-beneficiary to file the appeal, if they so desire in accordance with law.

¶90

Therefore, the appeals are dismissed as not maintainable.

¶91

In view of disposal of these appeals, all pending I.A.s are dismissed.

¶92

Sd/JUDGE

¶93

gab

The Assistant Commissinoer v. Akshay S/O Vishwanath Hampannavar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Assistant Commissinoer v. Akshay S/O Vishwanath Hampannavar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Karnataka, Vs Nagappa Gaddi S/O. Bharamappa Gaddi

The State of Karnataka, Vs Sharifsab Babusab Bisti

The State of Karnataka, Vs Govindappa Hanamappa Hugar

The Assistant Commissinoer Vs Mahammad Iqbal S/O Maheboobsab Hongal

The Assistant Commissinoer Vs Basappa Parappa Avaghadnavar

Basamma W/O Kyasara Giddaiah @ Kyasara Boraiah Vs Siddaruda S/O Bangarappa