Sri Ramaiah Since Dead Represented by Lr'S Gangarasamma Vs the State of Karnataka

THIS MFA FILED U/S.54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.17.09.2018 PASSED IN LAC NO.196/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, NELAMANGALA, DISMISSING THE REFERENCE U/S.18 OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT.

¶28

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARINGINTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

This appeal is filed by the appellants being legal heirs of

¶32

the claimant challenging the order dated 17.09.2018 passed

¶33

in LAC No.196/2009 (old No.61/2006), on the file of

¶34

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:28892 MFA No. 1656 of 2020

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nelamangala¹ , thereby, the Reference petition filed by the claimants is dismissed.

¶37

For the sake of convenience and easy reference,

¶38

the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Reference Court.

¶39

Heard the arguments of both the learned counsel

¶40

appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶41

Since, the Reference petition/application is dismissed after death of claimant, the order of the Reference Court is null and void as it is passed against dead person. Now, the legal heirs of the deceased claimant have preferred the appeal with a leave to prosecute the appeal. Leave is granted to prosecute the appeal by allowing the application filed for pursing the appeal.

¶42

It is submitted that the adjacent land owners,

¶43

who are adjacent to claimant’s land, have received a higher

¶44

1 hereinafter referred to as ‘the Reference Court’ for short

¶45

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:28892 MFA No. 1656 of 2020

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

amount of compensation and the claimants being legal heirs

¶48

of the deceased claimant are also entitled to claim the same compensation on parity as that of other adjacent land owners. Therefore, the Court is of the opinion to allow the appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment dismissing the Reference petition and remanding the case to the Reference Court for disposal on merits after receiving the evidence from both sides.

¶49

If there is any delay in filing the Reference petition and also since there is delay in preferring the appeal before this Court, whatever the reasons for delay in preferring the appeal on the part of the claimant or his legal heirs, they are not entitled to any interest in case if they succeed in the Reference petition.

¶50

In terms of the above, the appeal is liable to be

¶51

allowed.

¶52

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶53

5 -

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:28892 MFA No. 1656 of 2020

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

ORDER

¶57

i. The appeal is allowed .

¶58

ii. The order dated 17.09.2018 passed in LAC No.196/2009 (old No.61/2006) on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nelamangala, is hereby set aside.

¶59

iii. The matter is remanded to the Reference Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

¶60

iv. The parties shall appear before the Reference Court on 01.09.2025 without expecting notice from the Reference Court.

¶61

v. Liberty is reserved to both the parties to adduce evidence of oral or documentary or both, if they are so advised.

¶62

vi. The parties shall co-operate with the Reference Court for early disposal of the suit as expeditiously as possible without taking unnecessary adjournments.

¶63