Mohan S/O Krishnachar Malagi Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

2D. PARASANN S/O. MADAN MALAGI, AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. EMPLOYMENT, R/O. BAGALKOT, NOW RESIDING AT BENGALURU. (DELETED, AS PER THE ORDER DATED 09.01.2025)

¶17

(SINCE DECEASED, REP. BY HIS LRS/LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES APPELLANT NOS.2A TO 2C.)

¶18

2 -

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC-D:872 MFA No. 102910 of 2015

¶20

SHRIDHAR S/O. KRISHNACHAR MALAGI, AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. PRIVATE BUSINESS, R/O. BAGALKOT.

¶21

…APPELLANTS

¶22

(BY SRI PRABHAKAR A. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE.)

¶23

AND:

¶24

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BAGALKOT TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DIST: BAGALKOT.

¶25

…RESPONDENT

¶26

(BY SRI G.K.HIREGOUDAR, ADVOCATE.)

¶27

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE OR MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.03.2013 PASSED IN LAC NO.173/2012, BY THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE COURT, BAGALKOT AND FURTHER TO DETERMINE THE MARKET VALUE OF THE ACQUIRED STRUCTURE @ 80% OVER AND ABOVE THE COMPENSATION AWARDED BY THE RESPONDENT ALONG WITH ALL CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS WITH COSTS.

¶28

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)

¶31

This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 30.03.2013, passed by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkote, in LAC No.173/2012, seeking for enhancement of compensation.

¶32

3 -

¶33

NC: 2025:KHC-D:872 MFA No. 102910 of 2015

¶34

Heard the arguments on both the sides and perused the material placed on record.

¶35

In this case, open space measuring 690.18 sq.meters and a structure measuring 313.53 sq.meters in CTS No.188/2, situated in Ward No.10 of Bagalkote were acquired for the purpose of Upper Krishna Project through Bagalkote Town Development Authority, Bagalkote. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) has passed an award awarding a sum of Rs.28,27,630/- for structure. The appellants do not have grievance so far as award of compensation in respect of open space.

¶36

The reference Court has re-determined the compensation at the rate of 60% over and above the market value determined by the SLAO. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that in similarly situated land and structure in Ward No.5 of Bagalkote in LAC No.188/2014, the Reference Court has re-determined the compensation at the rate of 80% over and above the market value determined by the SLAO.

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC-D:872 MFA No. 102910 of 2015

¶39

Learned counsel for the appellant has produced copy of judgment in LAC No.188/2014. In this LAC No.188/2014, the property is situated at Ward No.5 of Bagalkote City. In the present appeal also the property is situated similar to that of the property in LAC No.188/2014. In LAC No.188/2014, the very same Reference Court has passed judgment on 29.10.2015 re-determining the compensation at the rate of 80% over and above the market value determined by the SLAO so far as structure is concerned.

¶40

This judgment of LAC No.188/2014 (supra) is challenged before this Court in MFA No.100336/2017 and this Court on 03.04.2018 has confirmed the judgment and award passed in LAC No.188/2014 the re-determination of compensation by the Reference Court at 80% over and above the market value determined by the SLAO.

¶41

When this being the order passed by this Court, in the present case on hand, the very same Court which passed the judgment in LAC No.188/2014 has re-determined lesser compensation at the rate of 60% over and above the

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:872 MFA No. 102910 of 2015

¶43

market value determined by the SLAO. This makes discrimination between the persons who are situated at the same pedestal. Therefore the appellants are entitled for re-determination of market value at the rate of 80% over and above the compensation determined by the SLAO so far as the structure is concerned.

¶44

Further, in respect of some other claimants, the respondent has satisfied the awards, which were re-determined at the rate of 80% over and above the market value determined by the SLAO. Therefore in this case also the claimants/appellants could not be made discrimination.

¶45

Hence, the appeal filed by the

¶46

appellants/claimants is allowed. The judgment and award dated 30.03.2013, passed by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Bagalkote, in LAC No.173/2012, is modified holding that the claimants/appellants are entitled for re-determination of compensation at the rate of 80% over and above the market value already determined by the SLAO, so far as structure is concerned, along with other statutory benefits and interest with costs.

¶47