- 1 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 105 OF 2023 (LA) BETWEEN: 1. SRI MOHAMMED RAFI SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS SMT APSHNA BEGUM S/O LATE MOHAMMED RAFI AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS R/A MANIKSAB PALYA KASABA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK TUMAKURU DIST-572216 2. SRI YASAR ARAFAT S/O LATE MOHAMMED RAFI AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS R/A MANIKSAB PALYA KASABA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK TUMAKURU DIST-572216 3. SMT ASMA BANU D/O LATE MOHAMMED RAFI AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/A MANIKSAB PALYA KASABA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK TUMAKURU DIST-572216 Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 4. KUM ALMAS D/O LATE MOHAMMED RAFI AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS R/A MANIKSAB PALYA KASABA HOBLI GUBBI TALUK TUMAKURU DIST-572216 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI.ADITYA M.R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI MOHAN KUMAR T.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISTION OFFICER HEMAVATHI CANAL ZONE TUMAKURU-572101 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.RAJENDRA K.R., AGA) MSA FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.02.2016 PASSED IN RA No. 47/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.02.2012 PASSED IN LAC No. 186/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, GUBBI, ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON IAs., THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT This Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed by the legal heirs of the original owner, challenging the judgment and award passed by the Second Additional District Judge, Tumakuru in R.A.(LAC) No.47/2015 dated 04.02.2016 passed and the judgment and award passed by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Gubbi in LAC No.186/2006 dated 08.02.2012. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the land bearing Sy.No.201/3, totally measuring 00-27 guntas, consisting of Mulki, i.e., 2 coconut trees, 11 mango trees and 70 Arecanut trees situated at Kodagihalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Gubbi Taluk belonging to the claimant was acquired by the respondents for the purpose of Hemavathi Channel and passed an award fixing the compensation amount as follows: (a) For 27 guntas of land Rs.20,871/- (b) For 2 Coconut Trees Rs. 6,358/- (c) For 11 Mango Trees Rs.49,987/- (d) For 70 Arecanut trees Rs,47,750/- - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 3. The Reference Court has enhanced compensation and determined Rs.54,000/- for 27 guntas of land acquired. Further, a compensation of Rs.8,320/- towards coconut trees, Rs.52,910/- towards 11 mango trees and Rs.74,690/- towards 70 Arecanut trees was granted. The original claimant has preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Court and the First Appellate Court confirmed the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court, but only modified in respect of compensation awarded towards mango trees. It was ordered that the original claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.18,000/- per each mango tree, for 11 mango trees. 4. There is a delay of 1968 days, i.e., 5 years 4 months in preferring the appeal. The claimant, who was the owner of the land – Mohammed Rafi has received the entire compensation amount granted by the Reference Court as well as the First Appellate Court. The original owner died on 02.07.2019. Now, the legal heirs of the said Mohammed Rafi have preferred the present appeal. - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 The reason assigned by the appellants is that there was Covid-19 Pandemic and they were suffering from financial difficulties. Hence, they could not meet the advocate and after approaching the advocate on the advise made by him, the present appeal is preferred. The learned counsel for the appellants places reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of 1K.SUBBARAYUDU AND OTHERS vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION) towards condonation of delay. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the respondent places reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of 2BASAVARAJA AND ANOTHER vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITON OFFICER and argued that ‘sufficient cause’ cannot be liberally interpreted if negligence, inaction or lack of bonafides is attributed to the party. 1 (2017) 12 SCC 840 2 (2013) 14 SCC 81 - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 6. On perusal of the said judgments, I am of the view that the reasons assigned in the judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the appellants are different from the reasons assigned in the instant case. Therefore, the aforesaid judgment is not helpful to the appellants. 7. The only reason assigned by the legal heirs of the original owner who have preferred the instant appeal is the pandemic Covid-19 situation and lockdown and financial difficulty. The lockdown due to Covid-19 pandemic was only for about six months and there is no proper explanation for causing the delay of 5 years 4 months. Furthermore, the original owner Mohammed Rafi has received the compensation amount and he has not challenged the same during his life time. But the legal heirs of Mohammed Rafi, after 5 years 4 months have challenged the judgment and award passed by both the courts below on the ground that the amount is meagre. 8. Considering the enormous delay in preferring the appeal, there is no convincing and cogent reasons - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:44643 MSA No. 105 of 2023 assigned for condonation of such an enormous delay. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed. Consequently, IA No.1/2024 for condonation of delay is also dismissed. 9. In view of dismissal of the main matter, all the pending IAs. do not survive for consideration. Accordingly, they stand disposed of. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE CM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6