Allowed

Andanagouda S/O Sangangouda Goudar v. the Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer Land Acquisiton Officer

Karnataka HC18 Apr 2024WP/101174/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A land acquisition compensation claimant sought mandamus directing the Executing Court to act on his application to release Rs.32,52,406 deposited under a compromise decree in Execution Case No.16/2021. The court held it could not wait indefinitely for an absent decree holder and allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Executing Court directed to consider Annexure-J application for payment of Rs.32,52,406 within 30 days.

Andanagouda S/O Sangangouda Goudar Vs the… — Execution and Attachment | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6517 WP No. 101174 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M.G.UMA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.101174/2024(LA-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

ANDANAGOUDA S/O. SANGANGOUDA GOUDAR, AGE: 74 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SHIRUR, TQ. AND DIST: BAGALKOTE – 587 120.

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI VIJAYENDRA BHIMAKKANAVAR, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE ADDITIONAL SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT NO. 1, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOTE, DIST: BAGALKOTE – 587 120.

¶14

Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOTE, DIST: BAGALKOTE – 587 120.

¶16

SHEKHARAGOUDA S/O. SANGANGOUDA GOUDAR, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: REVADIHAL VILLAGE, TQ: HUNAGUND, DIST: BAGALKOTE – 587 125.

¶17

MALLANGOUDA S/O. SANGANGOUDA GOUDAR,

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6517 WP No. 101174 of 2024

¶19

AGE: 68 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: REVADIHAL VILLAGE, TQ: HUNAGUND DIST: BAGALKOTE – 587 125.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR RESP. NO.1 AND 2) (NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS NO.3 AND 4 IS SERVED)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/DIRECTION TO THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUNGUND TO CONSIDER THE PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS ON THE APPLICATION VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND THEREBY FURTHER KINDLY DIRECT THE EXECUTING COURT FOR PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION OF RS.32,52,406/- ALONG WITH INTEREST DEPOSITED IN FDR NO.5/2023-24 OF CANARA BANK, HUNGUND, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. ISSUE APPROPRIATE DIRECTIONS, DIRECTING THE OFFICE OF THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HUNGUND TO RELEASE RS.32,52,406/- ALONG WITH THE INTEREST KEPT IN FIXED DEPOSIT BEARING FDR NO.5/2023-24 OF CANARA BANK, HUNGUND, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING - B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6517 WP No. 101174 of 2024

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of

¶27

writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hungund (for short, ‘the Trial Court’) to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application produced as per Annexure-J in Execution Case No.16/2021 for the purpose of releasing the amount that was deposited by respondent No.1.

¶28

Heard Sri Vijayendra Bhimakkanavar learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Kirtilata R. Patil learned HCGP appearing for respondents No.1 and 2.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶30

petitioner is the Decree Holder No.1, who was claimant before the Trial Court along with respondents No.3 and 4. There was a compromise between claimants in the suit O.S.No.35/2023 and they agreed to apportion the compensation in terms of the compromise. The suit O.S.No.35/2023 was accordingly decreed. Execution Case No.16/2021 was filed by the Decree Holders against respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 being the Judgment

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6517 WP No. 101174 of 2024

¶32

Debtor deposited the compensation amount before the Trial Court in terms of the compromise decree. The petitioner is entitled for the said amount. Therefore, he filed the application as per Annexure-J, seeking payment of the deposited amount. The said application is not being considered by the Executing Court on the ground that respondent No.4 being the Decree Holder No.3 is not appearing before the Court. Since respondent No.4 has already received his part of compensation, he is not appearing before the Executing Court. Under such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the petition.

¶33

Learned HCGP appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 submitted that the dispute is inter se between the Decree Holders, who are the claimants. Respondent No.1 has nothing to do with the same as the compensation amount of Rs.32,52,406/- is already deposited and it is for the Court to pass orders. Hence, she prays for passing appropriate orders.

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6517 WP No. 101174 of 2024

¶35

Perused the material on record.

¶36

As per the contention taken by the petitioner, the

¶37

suit O.S.No.35/2023 was filed for partition and separate possession. The same was decreed in terms of the compromise petition. The very same property said to have been acquired and respondent No.1 has deposited the compensation amount. According to the petitioner, he is entitled for the said amount and filed an application as per Annexure-J. Annexure-J is dated 27.06.2023. It is also stated that till date no order is passed on the said application. I do not find any reason to keep the application pending as it is stated that respondent No.3 has submitted no objection for allowing the application and for paying the amount to the petitioner. The Executing Court is required to consider the compromise decree and determine the entitlement of the petitioner for the compensation amount. The Court cannot indefinitely wait for respondent No.4 who is Decree Holder No.3, to appear before the Court and submit his no objection. Therefore, I am of the opinion that petition

¶38

¶39

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6517 WP No. 101174 of 2024

¶40

is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following :

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(i) Petition is allowed. (ii) The Executing Court is directed to consider the application Annexure-J filed by the petitioner for payment of amount of Rs.32,52,406/in Execution Case No.16/2021 in accordance with law within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶43

SD/JUDGE

¶44

CKK/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30

Andanagouda S/O Sangangouda Goudar v. the Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer Land Acquisiton Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Andanagouda S/O Sangangouda Goudar v. the Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer Land Acquisiton Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smuel S/O Immanuel Gowder Vs Prema W/O Shashikant Sankannavar

Smt. Radhika Nikam Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Ranjitsinh Ghorpade S/O Vijaysinh Ghorpade Vs the State of Karnataka

Sanjay S/O Maruthi Busagunde Vs the Joint Registrar of Co.Operative Societies and Hqa to the Commissioner for Cane Development

Smt Shruti W/O. Shankar Masankatti Vs Smt Kamalavva W/O Yallappa Halekoti

Sri Gopal S/O Ramappa Hugar Vs the State of Karnataka