IN THE HIGH COIJRT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.PATIL AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. VENUGOPALA GOWDA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 10221/2007 (LAC) BETWEEN: 1. BASAPPA NIJALINGAPPA, BIRADAR, AGE:62 YEARS, 0CC: AGRICULTURE, 2. NIJALINGAPPA, BASAPPA BIRADAR, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, AGRICULTURE, 3. PRAKASH BASAPPA BIRADAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, 0CC: AGRICULTURE, 4. SMT.MALLAWWA BASAPPA BIRADAR, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC:H H WORK. ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF ROLLI, BILAGI TQ. BAGALKOT DIST. :APPELLANTS (BY SRI P.A.KULKARNI, ADV.) AND: THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, UKP, BILAGI TQ. BAGALKOT DIST. RESPONDENT 2 (BY SRI. C.SPATIL, AGA) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.54(1) OF LA ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.01.2006, PASSED ON LAG NO.101/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.), BILAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FOR ENHANCED COMPENSATION AND SEKING FURTHER ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, N.K. PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The appellants were the owners of land bearing Sy. No.40(2+3+4+5B), 1+2+3+4+5+6, measuring 1 acre and 16 guntas of land situated at Rolli Village, Bilagi Taluk, Bagalkot Dist. The land came to be acquired by the respondent under the Upper Krishna Project in pursuance of the Notification issued under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act published in the Karnataka Gazette dated 30.4.1998. An Award came to be passed on 23.3.2000 offering the compensation of 28,000/- and 18,650/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the offer of the respondent, protesting against the Award made, the appellants sought reference of the matter to the Civil Court to determine the 4- market value of the acquired property. The reference having been made was registered as LAC No.101/05 in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Bilagi. The said case and a companion case registered as LAC No.102/05 were taken up by the Reference Court for consideration, the claim made by the appellants having been denied by the respondent, enquiry having taken place, claimants deposed as PWs 1 and 2 and Exs.P1 to P16 were marked. RW-1 having deposed for respondents, through him Exs,D1 to D6 were marked. The Reference Court having found merit in the claim of the appellants, allowed the reference petitions in part, entitling the appellants the compensation at the rate of 2,50,000/- p.a. in respect of pomogranate growing area, excluding phut kharab land, if any. The market value of the farm house which existed in the land was fixed at SO% over and above the compensation fixed by the LAO. The claimants were also held entitled to the statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the said Award passed by the Reference Court, the claimants have filed this appeal. 04 / — 4 2. Sri PA. Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri C.S. Patil, learned Addi. Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent submitted that, the matter is covered by the awards passed in respect of the adjoining lands which were acquired for the very same project whereby, compensation 5,75,OOO/- per acre came has been awarded in respect of pomogranate grown area and 1,9O,OOO/- per acre in respect of irrigated portion of land. Learned counsel further submitted that, the daimants / appellants have valued the acquired land at 6,OO,OOO/- per acre of pomogranate grown area and 1,7O,OOO/- per acre for 1 acre and 16 guntas of irrigated land. 3. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and the matter having been covered by the awards passed earlier in the companion appeals decided in this Court and as also agreed by the parties before the Lok Adalath, this appeal stands allowed in part determining the market value at 5,75,OOO/- per /‘ — acre in respect of pomoogranate grown area and 1,7O,OOO/- per acre in respect of irrigated land. 4. It is hereby made clear that though 1,9O,OOO/- per acre in respect of irrigated land has been awarded in the referred cases which have been decided earlier, in view of the appellants restraining their claim at 1,7O,OOO/- per acre, they are held entitled to compensation at 1,7O,OOO/ per acre Le., as per the valuation made in the appeal memo and the Court fee paid. The appeal stands allowed in part in the above terms. LA., JUDG•E Sd/ JUDGE sac*