- (1.) This appeal by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bangalore, has been brought to this Court on a certificate granted by the High Court of Mysore, and is from the decision of the said High Court dated 5th October 1953, in a regular appeal from an order made by the 2nd Additional District Judge, Bangalore, on 18th September 1950, on a reference under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) The facts so far as they are relevant to the appeal before us are these. An area of about 51,243 square yards of land was acquired by Government under Notification No. M. 11054 Med. 80-45-25 dated 16th April 1946, for development of the Appiah Naidu Maternity' Home at Malleswaram, Bangalore City, into a Maternity Hospital. There were eight owners interested in the property acquired, out of whom two objected to the award made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, now appellant before us. One of these two was T. Adinarayana Setty, a diamond merchant of Mysore City. Originally, he was the respondent before us, and on his death his son and legal representative has been brought into the record as the sole respondent to this appeal. The deceased respondent Adinarayana Setty (hereinafter called the respondent) was interested in 48,404 sq. yards out of the total area, and it may be stated here that there is no dispute before us that out of the said 48,404 sq. yards an area of about 3000 sq. yards consists of land which has been variously characterised as a depression or a pit or low-lying land (called 'halla' in the local vernacular language). Out of the total amount of compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, a sum of Rs. 1,41,169 was awarded to the respondent. The Special Land Acquisition Officer proceeded on the following basis for his award. Firstly, he found that the land value in and around Bangalore City had increased in recent years owing to the war and the respondent had paid to the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore District, a sum of money called a conversion fine for sanctioning a scheme of converting the land into non-agricultural land. Thereafter, a layout for building sites was prepared and approved by the Municipality and the respondent sold a few of the sites shown in the layout to some purchasers. This was done before the publication of the preliminary notification of acquisition; but the sale of further building sites was stopped after the said publication. Secondly, the Special Land Acquisition Officer took into consideration the value of the sites sold by the respondent and came to the conclusion that Rs. 10 per sq. yard was the market value of the land in question. He awarded to the respondent compensation for approximately 48, 404 sq. yards at the rate of Rs. 10 per sq. yard, but after deducting therefrom an area of 26, 248 sq. yards which, according to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, was required for making roads and drains as per the layout scheme. The total amount thus calculated came to Rs. 2,21,563 and odd and from this a sum of Rs. 98,807 was again deducted as representing the expenditure which would be require for making roads and drains. The net amount was thus found to be Rs. 1,22,756 and odd and adding 15% as the statutory compensation payable to the respondent the total amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to the respondent came to Rs. 1,41,169. Against this award, the respondent raised an objection, and a reference was accordingly made to the District Judge of Bangalore under S. 18 of the Act. This reference was heard by the 2nd Additional District Judge who by his order dated 18th September 1950, came to the following conclusions :- (i) that the rate awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs. 10 per sq. yard was fair and should be upheld ; (ii) that a sum of Rs. 10,000 for providing electric installation out of the sum of Rs. 98,807 deducted by the Land Acquisition Officer from the compensation payable to the respondent should not be deducted ; and (iii) that with regard to the area of the low-lying land which was completely excluded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the respondent should get at the rate of Rs. 3 per sq. yard or approximately a sum of Rs. 10,000. In other words, the learned Additional District Judge increased the compensation in favour of the respondent by a sum of about Rs. 20,000. Not being satisfied, the respondent preferred an appeal to the High Court of Mysore. The learned Judges of the High Court found that the proper compensation for the land, except the portion characterised as low-lying, should be Rs. 13-8-0 per sq. yard and as to the low-lying portion it should be reduced by Rs. 5 per sq. yard inasmuch as a sum of Rs. 15,000 was necessary, according to the evidence given in the case, for filling it up ; in other words, the High Court awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 8-8-0 per sq. yard for the low-lying land. The High Court also reduced the area which had to be deducted for making roads etc. according to the layout scheme from 26,248 sq. yards to 12,101 sq. yards. It also reduced the layout charges to Rs. 64,432. The High Court added to the compensation a sum of Rs. 7,000 as the value of a building which the respondent had constructed on one of the sites on the finding that the construction was made prior to the preliminary notification. In this respect the High Court departed from the finding of the Land Acquisition Officer that the building was put up after the publication of the preliminary notification. The total amount of compensation which the High Court awarded came to about Rs. 4,80,000 and odd.
(3.) As the judgment of the High Court was a judgment of reversal and the appellant felt dissatisfied with it, a certificate of fitness was asked for and was granted by the High Court on 6th July 1954. The present appeal has been brought to this Court in pursuance of that certificate.;