Partly allowed

M. Muniyappa Dead by Lrs v. Spl.L.a.O, B.D.A.

Karnataka HC22 Jul 2024MFA/3681/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a first appeal regarding compensation from land acquired through Land Acquisition Act. A final decree for specific performance existed but the sale deed was not executed before acquisition. The Court held that decree-holders are 'persons interested' and awarded them 5% of the deposited compensation with 95% to the decree-holder's successors.

What did the court decide?

95% of the deposited compensation awarded to the decree-holder's successor, and 5% to the appellants (original sellers).

M. Muniyappa Dead by Lrs Vs Spl.L.a.O, B.D.A. — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3681/2018 (LAC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

M. MUNIYAPPA DEAD BY LRS

¶8

VENKATESH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE 59 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.203 NUGGALIPALYA, ULLALU VILLAGE YEHSWANTHAPURA HOBLI BENGALURE NORTH TALUK BENGALURE – 560 110

¶9

Digitally signed by A K CHANDRIKA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

MUNIRAJU S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE 67 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.203 NUGGALIPALYA, ULLALU VILLAGE YEHSWANTHAPURA HOBLI BENGALURE NORTH TALUK BENGALURE-560110

¶11

M HANUMANTHAIAH S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE 67 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.203 NUGGALIPALYA, ULLALU VILLAGE YEHSWANTHAPURA HOBLI BENGALURE NORTH TALUK BENGALURE-560110

¶12

CHANDRAPPA S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE 51 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.203

¶13

¶14

NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶15

NUGGALIPALYA, ULLALU VILLAGE YEHSWANTHAPURA HOBLI BENGALURE NORTH TALUK BENGALURE-560110

¶16

SMT YELLAMMA W/O LATE MUNIYAPPA AGE 89 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.203 NUGGALIPALYA, ULLALU VILLAGE YEHSWANTHAPURA HOBLI BENGALURE NORTH TALUK

¶17

BENGALURE-560110 … APPELLANTS

¶18

(BY SRI. ANIL SHEKAR K S.,ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

SPL.L.A.O, B.D.A. T CHOWDAIAH ROAD KUMARAPARK WEST BANGALORE 560020

¶21

SMT MEENAKSHI B.D W/O LATE KRISHNAMURTHY NO.527, 53^RD CROSS 3^RD BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE – 560 010

¶22

SRI HOMBE GOWDA SINCE DECEASED REP BY LRS

¶23

K MARGAMMA

¶24

A. W/O LATE HOMBEGOWDA 65 YEARS NO.100, 12^TH MAIN ROAD M C LAYOUT, VIJAYNAGAR (BINNY LAYOUT 1ST STAGE) BANGALORE – 560 040

¶25

B. NANDISH H S/O LATE HOMBEGOWDA AGED 43 YEARS NO.100, 12^TH MAIN ROAD M C LAYOUT, VIJAYNAGAR (BINNY LAYOUT 1ST STAGE ) BANGALORE - 560 040

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶27

C. JAGADISH H S/O LATE HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.3, 1^ST CROSS SRESHAINAGAR, PATTEGARPALYA BANGALORE - 560 040

¶28

D. RATHNAMMA H W/O HONNAIAH D/O LATE HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.23, 1^ST CROSS, 4^TH MAIN A D HALLI, BANGALORE - 560079

¶29

E. SMT JALAJAKSHI W/O PUTTASWAMY D/O LATE HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.55, 4^TH CROSS VINAYAKA NAGAR BANGALORE – 560064

¶30

F. SMT LEELA MANJULA H W/O CHANNAIAH Y S D/O LATE HOMBEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS RESIDIG AT NO.50, 1^ST MAIN 3^RD CROSS, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT PATTEGARPALYA, BANGALORE - 560 040

¶31

SMT GEETHA KEMPEGOWDA NO.256, B-8, KALLAHALLI LAYOUT KENSINGHTAN ROAD BDA HOUSING COLONY BANGALORE – 560 042

¶32

M R DATTATRI S/O RAMA JOYIS NO.98, 1^ST MAIN ROAD VIJAYNAGAR BANGALORE - 560 040

¶33

SMT THILOTHAMA C SALIAN W/O M R CK SALIAN NO.826/A, 2^ND FLOOR

¶34

¶35

NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶36

5^TH MAIN ROAD

¶37

VIJAYNAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 040

¶38

SRI N SUBRAMANIYAN S/O S NAGAPPAN NO.2050, 10^TH CROSS RPC LAYOUT, VIJAYNAGAR BANGALORE - 560 040

¶39

SRI S NAGAPPA S/O LATE SUBRAMANIYAN NO.269, 8^TH MAIN ROAD 6^TH A CROSS, RPC LAYOUT VIJAYNAGAR BANGALORE - 560 040

¶40

SMT S SUSHILA W/O SURESHKUMAR NO.146/8, 1^ST FLOOR NEAR PUTTAPPA YADAM TIPPASANDRA BANGALORE – 560 075

¶41

M CHANDRASHEKAR C/O NO.202, 11^TH CROSS ROAD NAGENDRA BLOCK, SRINAGAR BANGALORE - 560 050

¶42

B N ALIMULLA NO.82/1, 7^TH CROSS CHOLARAPALYA, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE - 560025

¶43

SMT PADMALATHA W/O SRIDHAR GUPTHA NO.339/1, PRIYANKA NILAYA SRIGANDHA NAGAR HEGGANAHALLI PEENYA 2^ND STAGE BANGALORE - 560 098

¶44

SMT SAVITHA ANKANAHALLI, KOPPA HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 425

¶45

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶46

SMT DUNDAMMA W/O BADRAPPA VINAYAKA NAGAR KAMAKSHIPALYA BANGALORE – 560 079

¶47

M R KRISHNAMURTHY NO.206/2, 7^TH CROSS 2^ND MAIN ROAD HANUMANTHNAGAR BANGALORE - 560010

¶48

SMT K P PUSHPA W/O K PRAKASHKUMAR 5^TH A CROSS, 2^ND STAGE 2^ND PHASE, WEST OF CHORD ROAD MAHALSHMI PURAM BANGALORE – 560 086

¶49

SRIDHAR GUPTHA S/O CHELUVARAJ NO.339/1, 2^ND MAIN ROAD HEGGANAHALLI (EAST) SRIGANDHA NAGAR PEENYA IIND STAGE BANGALORE - 560 098

¶50

CHIKKARAYA S/O KEMPEGOWDA NO.76, 4^TH MAIN ROAD 10^TH CROSS, BAPUJINAGAR MYSORE ROAD BANGALORE – 560 026

¶51

VENKATESH ANJANAPPA LAYOUT NEAR MUNESHWARA TEMPLE VRISHBHAVATHI NAGAR MAGADI ROAD KAMAKSHIPALYA BANGALORE – 560 079

¶52

KAMALADEVI W/O B VENKATESH ANJANAPPA LAYOUT NEAR MUNESHWARA TEMPLE VRISHABAHAVATHI NAGAR

¶53

¶54

NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶55

MAGADI ROAD

¶56

BANGALORE – 560 079

¶57

SMT ARCHANA NO.72, 11^TH MAIN ROAD HANUMANTHNAGAR BANGALORE – 560 010

¶58

C K KRISHNASWAMY NO.85, 2^ND MAIN ROAD SAMPIGE LAYOUT PRASHANTHNAGAR BANGALORE – 560 040

¶59

SRI C RUDRESH NO.202, 11^TH CROSS ROAD NAGENDRA BLOCK SRINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 050

¶60

SATHISHKUMAR UJAL NO.28/3-1 SRINVASA NILAYA YARENAHALLI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 040

¶61

SMT BHAGYAMMA C/O HOMBEGOWDA NO.100, 12^TH MAIN ROAD M C LAYOUT, VIJAYNAGAR (BINNI LAYOUT 1^ST STAGE) BANGALORE - 560 010

¶62

BOLALINGEGOWDA NO.82/1, CROSS OPP TO PRAGATHI STEEL CHOLARAPALYA, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE – 560 023

¶63

D N KRISHNACHARY MARUTHI NAGAR BESIDE ANJANEYA TEMPLE KAMAKSHIPALYA MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE – 560 079

¶64

BALARAM NO.4, 16 B MAIN ROAD 2^ND PHASE, 3^RD STAGE

¶65

¶66

NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶67

BASAVESHWARANAGAR

¶68

BANGALORE - 560 079

¶69

SRI A S RAJASHEKAR S/O SOMANARAYANSHETTY NO.1370, 2^ND CROSS 18^TH A MAIN ROAD, J P NAGAR 2^ND STAGE, BANGALORE – 560 078

¶70

SRI T T MOHAN NO.101, BLOCK A, C.I.L, COLONY, 3^RD MAIN ROAD 2^ND CROSS, SANJAYNAGAR BANGALORE-560094

¶71

JABILULLA NO.144/5, 2^ND MAIN ROAD VIDYRANYAPURA, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE-560 023

¶72

SRI C NANJAPPA VINAYAKANAGAR RUDRAPPA ESTATE KAMAKSHIPALYA BANGALORE-560079

¶73

NINGEOGWDA NO.82, 7^TH CROSS CHOLARAPALYA, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE-560023

¶74

M PRAKASH NO.10/1, M M HALLI NAGARAPETE BANGALORE - 560002

¶75

SARASWATHI B NO.28/3-1, 20^TH CROSS MARENAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 010

¶76

NANDEESHAPPA NO.1431, 7^TH MAIN, 4^TH CROSS 5^TH STAGE, 1^ST PHASE BEML, RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR BANGALORE-560039

¶77

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶78

SMT N PARVATHAMMA D/O A NAJUNDAPPA NO.4/12, MUNIYAPPA BUILDING SOLLAPURADAMMA SUNKADAKATTE, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE-560091

¶79

SHIVARUDRAPPA TATRANE S/O HUCHHAPPA TATRANE NEAR HARALIMARA BUS STOP MUNIYAPPA BUILDING, VISHVANIDAM BANGALORE-560091

¶80

SRI G N RAVIKUMAR S/O T G NANJUNDAPPA GOWDRU THIMLAPURA, KALLAHALLI POST BADRAVATHI TALUK- 577 233

¶81

PARVATHAMMA W/O A NANJUNDAPPA NO.11/1, HARALIKATTE SUNKADAKATTE VISHWANIDAM POST MAGADI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560 091

¶82

NANDEESHAPPA S/O ANNAMAPPA NO.11/1, SUNKADAKATTE MAGDI MAIN ROAD VISHWANIDAM POST BANGALORE-560091

¶83

K N PRAKASH ADVOCATE NO.51, 7^TH CROSS, SHIRASI ROAD CHAMRAJPETE

¶84

BANGALORE-560018

¶85

NARAYANAPPA ULLALU, YESHVANTHPURA HOBLI BANGALORE – 560 110

¶86

NAGARAJU S/O LATE MUNIKRISHNAPPA ULLALU GRAMA YESHVANTHPURA

¶87

¶88

NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶89

BANGALORE NORTH BANGALORE – 560 110

¶90

B K RAJANNA N.K(OPR) , NO.15103373 A 158/6, MED REGT C/O 56, APO OR B K RAJANNA NO.56/4, 1^ST TEMPLE ROAD 13^TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE-560003

¶91

SRI V K SHRAMA NO.61, MEDIUM REGISTER C/O 56 APO

¶92

MUNIYAPPA S/O MUNIHANUMAIAH ULLALU GRAMA, BANGALORE, NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE-560110

¶93

NARAYANA S/O NARSAPPA MUDDANAPLAYA VISWANIDAM POST YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH BANGALORE-560040

¶94

BALARAYA S/O RATHNAMMA NO.416, 5^TH MAIN ROAD 3^RD STAGE, 2ND BLOCK BOVI COLONY BASAVESHWARNAGAR BANGALORE-560 079

¶95

ALIMULLA S/O B H SABULAL NO.144/5, 2^ND MAIN ROAD VIDYARANYAPURA, MAGADI ROAD BANGALORE – 560 023

¶96

A N RAJESHEKAR NO.1918, 2^ND STAGE 4^TH MAIN ROAD, 12TH CROSS VIJAYANAGAR BANGALORE- 560 040

¶97

10 -

¶98

NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶99

KRISHNAPPA ULLALU, YESHVANTHPURA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE – 560 110

¶100

MUNIYAPPA S/O SURAPPA YESHWANTHPURA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE- 560 110

¶101

NAGARAJU S/O MUNIKRISHNA ULLALU, YESHVANTHPURA HOBLI BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE- 560 110

¶102

PAPPANNA ULLALU GRAMA YESHVANTHPURA BANGALORE NORTH TALUK BANGALORE-560 110 … RESPONDENTS

¶103

(BY SRI. K KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI M.B.NARGUND, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI LAXMINARAYAN.N HEDGE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI S NAGABHUSHANA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R3(B) IS GPA HOLDER FOR R3(A)(C)(D)(E) AND (F) NOTICE TO R4 TO R55 IS DISPENSED WITH V/C/O/ DTD.23.01.2020)

¶104

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.02.2018 PASSED IN LAC NO.143/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU, [CCH-17], PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶105

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶106

11 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶107

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND

¶108

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶109

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶110

(PER: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

¶111

Challenging the rejection of their claim petition, claimant

¶112

Nos.2(a) to 2(e) in LAC No.143/2010 on the file of II-Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru(CCH-17), have preferred this appeal.

¶113

Admitted facts are as follows:

¶114

(i) The appellants were the legal representatives of one M. Muniyappa. M. Muniyappa entered into an agreement of sale with D.R Krishna Murthy, husband of respondent No.2 in respect of land bearing Sy.No.57 of Ullalu village, Yeshwanthpura Hobli, Bengaluru North Taluk measuring 2 acres 27 guntas. One gunta out of the said land was Kharab land. The agreed consideration was Rs.94,000/-. Out of that, Muniyappa had received Rs.88,600/as advance sale consideration. Muniyappa did not execute sale deed in favour of D.R Krishna Murthy in terms of agreement dated 14.04.1988. Therefore, D.R Krishna Murthy filed O.S.No.5877/1990 before XXX-Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. On

¶115

12 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶116

contest, the said suit was decreed on 30.07.1999. Ex.P1 in LAC

¶117

No.143/2010 is the said judgment and decree.

¶118

(ii) D.R Krishna Murthy died on 18.10.1999. BDArespondent No.1 issued preliminary notification on 15.04.2002 to acquire the said land for formation of Sir.M.Vishweshwaraiah Nagara layout. On 15.04.2002 respondent No.2 and her sons the legal representatives of Krishna Murthy filed Execution Petition No.820/2002 against M. Muniyappa seeking execution of the judgment and decree in O.S.No.5877/1990. On 31.10.2002 BDA issued final notification. Muniyappa died on 10.07.2006 leaving behind him the present appellants as his legal representatives. They were brought on record as his legal representatives in Execution Petition No.820/2002.

¶119

(iii) On 11.09.2008 the Executing Court in Execution Petition No.820/2002 ordered for execution of sale deed through the Court Commissioner. The Court had even approved the draft sale deed. When the Court Commissioner approached the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar for execution and registration of the sale deed, it was informed that the land is acquired, therefore, execution of the sale deed is not possible.

¶120

13 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶121

(iii) After passing the award, respondent No.1 deposited Rs.16,22,695/- towards the compensation for acquisition of the land. Since the appellants, respondent No.2 and other respondents made competing claim for the said amount, respondent No.1 acting under Section 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (for short ‘L.A Act’) made a reference to the Civil Court and remitted the amount in deposit to the Civil Court for deciding the entitlement of the parties to the compensation.

¶122

Before the Trial Court the present respondent No.2 was examined as PW.1, appellant No.2 was examined as PW.3 and present respondent No.4/claimant No.14(b) was examined as PW.2. On behalf of the present respondent No.2, Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. The other parties did not adduce evidence.

¶123

The Trial Court on hearing the parties by the impugned judgment and order rejected the claim petition of the appellants and other claimants and allowed the claim of the present respondent No.2 on the ground that decree for specific performance passed in favour of her predecessor Krishna Murthy has attained finality. Therefore, she is entitled to

¶124

14 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶125

receive the compensation. Challenging the said judgment and order, the above appeal is preferred.

¶126

Sri Anil Shekar K.S, learned Counsel for the

¶127

appellants reiterating the grounds of appeal submits that though there was a decree for specific performance in favour of Krishna Murthy, since the title was not passed to Krishna Murthy or claimant No.1 before the lands were acquired, they are not entitled to compensation. He further submits that in the suit, the claimant/Krishna Murthy had not sought alternate relief for compensation or damages. In the absence of such relief, the Trial Court erred in holding that respondent No.2 is entitled to receive compensation. In support of his submission, he relies on the following judgments:

¶128

(i) Jagdish Singh Vs. Natthu Singh¹

¶129

(ii) Urmila Devi and others Vs. Deity, Mandir Shree Chamunda Devi through Temple Commissioner and others²

¶130

(iii) Universal Petro-Chemicals Limited Vs. B.P.PLC and others³

¶131

(iv) Sukhbir Vs. Ajit Singh⁴

¶132

Controverting the submission of learned Counsel for

¶133

the appellants, Sri M.B.Nargund, learned Senior Counsel

¶134

1 AIR 1992 SC 1604

¶135

2 (2018) 2 SCC 284

¶136

3 (2022) 6 SCC 157

¶137

4 (2021) 6 SCC 54

¶138

15 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶139

appearing for Sri Laxminarayan N Hegde, learned advocate on record for respondent No.2 submits that for setting up the claim under Sections 18 or 30 of the L.A Act, it is sufficient if the claimant has an interest in the property. He submits that the decree for specific performance granted in favour of Krishna Murthy had attained finality, only formally the sale deed had to be executed. But for compulsory acquisition of land, the decree holder and his successor were entitled to all benefits accruing out of the said land. He further submits that when the said suit was filed, the claimants had not foreseen the acquisition of land, therefore question of seeking alternate relief for compensation does not arise and judgments relied on by the learned Counsel for the appellant are not applicable. He submits that observation of the Trial Court that respondent No.2 herein is not entitled to seek reference under Section 18 of the L.A Act was unwarranted and uncalled for and does not affect the rights of respondent No.2 to make a claim under Section 18 of the L.A Act.

¶140

Sri K.Krishna, learned Counsel for respondent No.1 BDA submits that compensation amount is already deposited. Respondent No.1 abides by the order of the Court.

¶141

16 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶142

On hearing both sides and examining the materials on record, the point that arises for consideration of the Court is “whether the Trial Court was justified in rejecting the claim of the appellants.”

¶143

Analysis:

¶144

As already noticed, there is absolutely no dispute between the parties regarding dates and events in the matter. The appellant also does not dispute that they claimed interest in the property through Muniyappa, who suffered a decree for specific performance in O.S.No.5877/1990 and that judgment had attained finality. It is also not disputed that the said suit was decreed as long back as on 30.07.1999 in the following terms:

¶145

“Suit of the plaintiff is decreed with costs.

¶146

Defendant is directed specifically to perform the agreement by executing the sale deed and to do all acts necessary to put the plaintiff in full ownership of the suit schedule property. If the defendant fails to execute the sale deed, plaintiff is at liberty to get the sale deed executed through the process of Court by making payment or deposit of balance consideration in Court.”

¶147

It is also not disputed that on 15.04.2002 the legal

¶148

representatives of Krishna Murthy filed Execution Petition No.820/2002, preliminary notification was also issued on

¶149

17 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶150

15.04.2002 and final notification was issued on 31.10.2002.

¶151

But by that time, decree passed in O.S.No.5877/1990 had attained finality.

¶152

Similarly, the finding that, agreed sale consideration was Rs.94,000/- and out of that Muniyappa had received Rs.88,600/- from the purchaser Krishna Murthy has also attained finality. In the Execution Case No.820/2002 admittedly the draft sale deed was also submitted and that was approved by the Executing Court. The Court Commissioner was appointed to execute the sale deed. But for acquisition of land, the decree holder had acquired all interest in the property.

¶153

Sections 18 and 30 of the L.A Act which was applicable to this case do not speak of the claim of title holders, but the claim of the ‘person interested’ in the property. Section 3(b) of the L.A Act defines the ‘person interested’ as follows:

¶154

3(b) The expression “person interested” includes all persons claiming an interest in compensation to be made on account of the acquisition of land under this Act; and a person shall be deemed to be interested in land if he is interested in an easement affecting the land;

¶155

Obviously, the aforesaid definition of 'person

¶156

interested' does not say that 'person interested' is only a title

¶157

18 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶158

holder, it is an inclusive definition involving all persons claiming

¶159

interest in the compensation to be made on account of acquisition of the land. By virtue of the decree in O.S.No.5877/1990, interest is vested in the decree holders to seek the benefits accruing out of the land in question except for their obligation of paying balance consideration of Rs.5,400/(Rs.94,000 - Rs.88,600). Therefore, there is no merit in the contention that as there was no sale deed in favour of respondent No.2, decree holder was not entitled to make a claim under Section 30 of the LA Act.

¶160

As far as the claim of the other respondents, that was rejected by the trial Court and they have not preferred any appeal against the same. Moreover, whatever sale deeds were set up by Nandish H., PW-2/claimant No.14(b), were hit by lis pendence as they were allegedly executed during the pendency of the suit. Reading of the judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the appellants shows that in all those cases, the decree for specific performance had not attained finality, In fact, they were the appeals against the decree for specific performance. In paragraph Nos.10 & 11 of the judgment in Sukhbir's case relied on by the learned counsel for the

¶161

19 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶162

appellants themselves, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in such cases, the plaintiff will be deemed to be in the shoes of the defendant, therefore shall be entitled to the amount of compensation, determined and awarded under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. It was also held that the contention that the plaintiff is not entitled to compensation even considering Section 21 of the Specific Relief Act has no substance. Therefore, the aforesaid judgments do not advance the case of the appellants. However, since the balance consideration of Rs.5,400/- was due since 30.07.1999, from the date of decree in O.S.No.5877/1990, the appellants are entitled to claim compensation in that ratio out of the amount in deposit.

¶163

The advance consideration of Rs.88,600/- paid out of Rs.94,000/- constitutes 94.25% (Rs.88,600 X 100/94000= 94.25%) of the entire sale consideration. The suit of the plaintiff was decreed with costs. Since last more than 3 ½ decades, the decree holders have not reaped any benefits and the original decree holder left the world without seeing the benefits of the decree secured by him. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the interest of justice would be met by

¶164

20 - NC: 2024:KHC:28813-DB MFA No.3681/2018

¶165

awarding 95% of the amount in deposit to respondent No.2, who was claimant No.1 before the trial Court, and awarding 5% of the amount in deposit to the appellants i.e., claimant Nos.2(a) to 2(e) together. The appeal succeeds only to that extent.

¶166

As rightly pointed out by Sri.M.B.Nargund, learned Senior counsel, the observation of the reference Court that claimant No.1 is not entitled to seek reference under Section 18 of the LA Act was uncalled for as it was called upon to decide only the entitlement of the parties. Moreover, the trial Court in making such observations, failed to note the concept of 'person interested' under Section 18 read with Section 3(b) of the Act. If at all any such claim is made under Section 18 of the Act, the reference Court shall decide the same in accordance with law. All contentions of the parties in that regard are kept open. Hence, the following:

¶167

ORDER

¶168

The appeal is partly allowed.

¶169

The reference Court is hereby directed to disburse 95% of the amount in deposit with proportionate accrued interest to claimant No.1 and remaining 5% with proportionate accrued

¶170