- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6355 WP No. 102709 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO. 102709 OF 2022 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER BAGALKOT TOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BAGALKOT-587101. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. OMKAR L.DESAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MEHABOOBI @ MUMTAJ W/O. MOHAMMADHUSSAIN JAMAKHANDI, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: BAGALKOT, BAGALKOT-587101. 2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, BAGALKOT-587101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.C.HUKKER, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. ASHOK T.KATTIMANI, AGA FOR R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI TO QUASHING THE ORDER PASSED IN E.P.NO.205/2014 (LAC NO.2269/2014) ON THE FILE OF II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, BAGALKOT, DATED 28.01.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.04.17 10:26:53 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6355 WP No. 102709 of 2022 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order passed by the Executing Court on the memo filed by the petitioner herein. 2. The petitioner, who is Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bagalkot Town Development Authority, had filed a memo contending that entire money is paid to the decree holder and there are no dues as alleged by the decree holder and therefore, objected the calculation submitted by the decree holder. Executing Court on verification of the records found that the matter was compromised between the petitioner and respondents. Accordingly, joint memo was filed. 3. The contention of the petitioner herein that there is no balance amount due as claimed by the decree holder is not acceded to by the Executing Court. At paragraphs-14 and 15, the Executing Court has dealt with calculation and has come to the conclusion that the petitioner herein is still liable to pay a sum of Rs.52,178/- - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6355 WP No. 102709 of 2022 from the date of second deposit i.e. 12.11.2019 until realization. The said order is under challenge. 4. The Executing Court has perused the impugned order in detail. As per the said order, the total compensation awarded amounts to Rs.2,23,615/-. In addition to the principal compensation amount, interest was calculated at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year and 15% per annum for the subsequent period, commencing from 30.03.2012 and continuing up to 26.08.2014. Based on these calculations, the executing court determined that a total interest of Rs.1,00,902/- had accrued on the principal amount during the relevant period. 5. The executing court further took into consideration that the petitioner had made an initial deposit on 26.08.2014, amounting to Rs.2,16,478/-, which also included an amount deducted towards income tax. Upon examination of this deposit, the court found that a sum of Rs.1,15,576/- from the said deposit could be - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6355 WP No. 102709 of 2022 attributed towards adjustment of the principal compensation amount of Rs.2,23,615/-. Consequently, even after the first deposit, there remained a balance of Rs.1,08,039/- towards the unpaid principal and accrued interest. 6. It is pertinent to note that at paragraph 15 of the executing court’s order, a detailed computation has been provided, outlining how the deposited amount was apportioned, particularly in respect of the interest component. The said calculations demonstrate that even after accounting for the earlier payment, the petitioner remains liable for a balance amount of Rs.52,178/-, which continues to carry interest at the rate of 15% per annum. These figures were submitted by the respondent–decree holder, and the executing court has scrupulously verified and adopted the same in its reasoning. 7. In the absence of any rebuttal or counter- calculation submitted by the petitioner to contest the accuracy of these figures, the executing court’s reliance on - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6355 WP No. 102709 of 2022 the decree holder’s computation appears justified. As such, there is no apparent error or illegality in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court. The writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE MBS Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15