@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
1. All these appeals are filed u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging the awards passed by the Reference Court, either on a reference made u/s 18(3) of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by the Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment) Act XVII of 1961, or u/s 30 of the Land Acquisition Act.
2. These appeals were posted before the learned single Judge for orders on the objection raised by the office regarding the maintainability of the same before this Court. Objection regarding maintainability was raised by the Registry in the light of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 as amended by the Karnataka High Court and Certain Other Laws (Amendment) Act, 2007 (Karnataka Act No. 26 of 2007), whereunder the jurisdiction of the District Court to entertain appeals from the decrees and orders passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) in original suits and proceedings of civil nature has been increased to Rs. Ten lakhs. Before the learned single Judge, the Counsel for the Appellants placed reliance on the judgment of Division Bench of this Court reported in ILR 2007 Kar 4 (C.V. Palakshan v. Kallumane Madaiah, since dead by L.Rs. ), to contend that a Division Bench of this Court has already held that as per Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, it is the High Court which alone has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal preferred against an award passed on a reference u/s 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. In the light of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench, wherein certain observations were made holding that an appeal shall lie to the High Court in any proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act from the award passed, the learned Single Judge after examining the matter in the light of the provisions contained u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by the Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment) Act XVII of 1961, read with Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, particularly in the wake of the Division Bench not referring to the State amendment and only proceeding on the basis of Section 54 of the Central Act, has opined that to put at rest the controversy regarding the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the appeals arising from the awards passed under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, the matter deserved to be referred to the Larger Bench. That is how these cases have come up before the Full Bench for consideration.
3. We have heard the learned Counsel for both the parties.
4. In the light of the order of reference, the question of law that arises for consideration is,
which is the Appellate Forum for preferring an appeal against the award passed by the Court under the provisions of Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by the State Amendment vide Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment) Act XVII of 1961 read with Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964?
5. In the facts of the present case, M.F.A. No. 422/2010 is filed challenging the judgment/order passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Udupi, in LAC No. 12/2007 answering the reference made u/s 30 of the Land Acquisition Act holding that the claimant therein was entitled to receive the award amount deposited. The other three Miscellaneous First Appeals bearing Nos. 5446/2009, 5447/2009 and 5448/2009 arise out of the judgment and award passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Puttur, Dakshina Kannada in LAC Nos. 21/1991, 20/1991 and 10/1991, respectively, on the reference made u/s 18(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, thereby enhancing the market value and compensation payable to the acquired lands. The Indian Council for Agricultural Research which is the beneficiary of the acquisition is aggrieved by the enhancement of market value of the acquired land and the compensation payable thereon in the said three Appeals.
6. The question for consideration is, whether these appeals are maintainable before this Court. To answer this question, it is necessary to refer to Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. We may usefully extract here Section 54 of the Central Act and as also the State amendment brought to it in its application to the State of Karnataka vide Section 35 of the Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment) Act XVII of 1961.
Section 54: Appeals in proceedings before Court.- (1) Subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) applicable to appeals from original decrees, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any enactment for the time being, in force, an appeal shall only lie in any proceedings under this Act to the High Court from the award, or from any part of the award, of the Court and from any decree of the High Court passed on such appeal as aforesaid an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court subject to the provisions contained in Section 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and in Order XLV thereof.
Section 54 as amended by the Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment) Act XVII of 1961.
54. Appeals in proceedings before Court.- (1) Subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, applicable to appeals from original decrees, an appeal shall lie from the award, or from any part of the award, of the Court in any proceedings under this Act to the Court authorised to hear appeals from the decision of that Court.
(2) From any decree of a Court, other than the High Court, passed on an appeal under Sub-section (1), an appeal shall be to the High Court, if but only if, the amount or value of the subject-matter in dispute in appeal exceeds two thousand rupees or the case involves any question of title to land.
(3) From any decree of the High Court passed on an appeal under Sub-section (1), an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court, subject to the provisions contained in Section 110 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and in Order XLV of the First Schedule to the said Code.
7. It is apparent from Section 54 of the Central L.A. Act that an appeal shall lie in any proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act only to the High Court from the award or from any part of the award of the Court. However, the Karnataka Amendment brings about a change in the position. As per subclause (1) of Section 54 as amended by the Land Acquisition (Mysore Extension and Amendment) Act XVII of 1961, an appeal is provided from the award or from any part of the award of the Court in any proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act to the Court authorised to hear the appeals from the decision of that Court. Sub-section (2) of Section 54 provides that, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against any decree of a Court passed on an appeal under Sub-section (1), only if the value of the subject-matter in dispute in the appeal exceeds Rs. 2,000/- or the case involves any question of title to land. Sub-section (3) provides for a further appeal from the decree passed by the High Court to the Supreme Court.
8. In the present case, Sub-section (1) of Section 54 has relevance. Under this clause, against the award passed by the Court, an appeal lies to the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decision of that Court. The expression ''Court'' as defined u/s 3(d) as amended by Section 6 of the Mysore Amendment Act 17 of 1961, means a Principal Civil Judge of original jurisdiction, and includes any other Civil Court empowered by the State Government by a notification in the Official Gazette, to perform the functions of the Court under this Act, within the pecuniary and local limits of its jurisdiction''. It is an undeniable fact that in the State of Karnataka, the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) is clothed with the functions of the ''Court'' under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The impugned awards in these cases are all passed by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Puttur in Dakshina Kannada District. Thus, as per Section 54(1), an appeal lies against these awards to the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decision of the Senior Civil Judge/Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.).
9. The State Legislature has enacted the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, in order to provide for a uniform law relating to the constitution, powers and jurisdiction of the Civil Courts in the State sub-ordinate to the High Court of Karnataka. Section 19 of the said Act, provides for appeals from the decrees and orders passed by a Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) in original suits and proceedings. It reads as under:
19. Appeals from Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.).- Appeals from the decrees and orders passed by a Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) in original suits and proceedings of a civil nature, shall when such appeals are allowed by law, lie -
(1) to the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit or proceeding does not exceed ten lakh rupees;
(2) to the High Court, in other cases.
10. It is thus clear from Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, that against the awards passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge where the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit or proceeding is less than Rupees Ten Lakhs, an appeal lies to the District Court.
11. In the instant case, as can be seen from the valuation made by the Appellants in the appeal memo, for the purpose of payment of Court fee, the value of the subject-matter in all these appeals is less than Ten lakh rupees. It is in this background that the Registry has raised an objection regarding the maintainability of the appeals before this Court in the light of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964. Therefore, the further question that arises for our consideration is as to how the value of the subject-matter is to be ascertained to know whether it is less than Rupees Ten lakhs or more. A careful perusal of Section 19 will provide an answer as the criteria for determining the value of the subject-matter for the purpose of deciding the jurisdiction of the appellate forum is the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit or proceeding and not the amount or value of the subject-matter of the appeal. The language employed in Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, stating ''when the amount or value of the subject matter of the original suit or proceeding does not exceed Rupees Ten Lakhs, appeal shall lie to the District Court'', clearly denotes that it is the value of the subject-matter of the original proceeding that determines the appellate forum. Therefore, in order to determine whether it is the District Court or the High Court which has got the jurisdiction to entertain the present appeals, the claim made by the claimant landowners before the Reference Court becomes relevant.
12. It is necessary to notice here the amount claimed by the claimant in the application filed by him under Sub-section (1) of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, will be the subject-matter of the proceedings before the Reference Court. If the said amount as claimed by the claimant does not exceed Rupees Ten Lakhs, then appeal lies only to the District Court. If the amount exceeds Rupees Ten Lakhs, then appeal lies to the High Court. In the Appeals before us MFA Nos. 5446/2009, 5447/2009 and 5448/2009 are filed by the beneficiary of the acquisition - the Indian Council for Agricultural Research being aggrieved by the enhancement of compensation made by the Reference Court. The criteria that determines the appellate forum is no different even where the Appeal is by the acquiring body or the beneficiary. Similar is the position in MFA No. 422/2010, wherein, because of the rival claims laid for the amount of compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer, the matter was referred u/s 30 by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, KIADB, Baikampadi, Mangalore, for apportionment of the award amount. In such a situation, based on the value of the share of the claimants in the amount awarded, the Appellate Forum has to be decided.
In the light of the above, it is clear that the Registry was not right and justified in proceeding on the basis of the valuation of the subject-matter of the appeal made for the purpose of payment of Court fee on the appeal memo. Valuation for the purpose of payment of Court fee is required to be made u/s 48 of the Karnataka Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1957, on the basis of the difference between the amount claimed by the Appellant in the appeal and the amount awarded. But, that has no relevance for the purpose of determining the appellate forum, for which the claim made in the petition filed for reference which is in effect the original proceeding that has set in motion the adjudication by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.)/Reference Court culminating in the award passed. In fact, a similar question arose in the case of K. Malkoji Rao alias Kapathappa v. Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer, Bellary 1977 (1) KLJ 173, wherein the then Chief Justice Hon''ble Justice Govind Bhat has held that as per Section 19 of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964, what determines the forum of appeal is not the amount in dispute, tut, the amount or value of the subject-matter of the proceedings before the Civil Judge''s Court. This position is followed and reiterated by a Division Bench of this Court in the decision in the case of
In view of the foregoing, we are of the clear view that the decision in ILR 2007 Kar 4 cannot be understood as laying down a proposition that against the awards passed by the Court under the Land Acquisition Act, appeal lies only to the High Court. In fact, the question that arose in the said case was, whether the order passed by the Reference Court in a reference u/s 30 of the Land Acquisition Act was appealable u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act or u/s 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Therefore, the observations made by the Division Bench in paragraph 4 of the said judgment to the effect that ''so far as appeal from the award passed u/s 30 of the Act, appeal will lie only to the High Court u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act'' cannot be regarded as laying down a correct position of law. In fact, the Division Bench in the said case has not referred to Section 54 of the Act, as amended by Mysore Amendment Act 17 of 1961.
In the light of the discussion made above, the reference is answered holding that if the value of the subject-matter of the claim before the Reference Court does not exceed Ten Lakh Rupees, appeal lies to the District Court and if it exceeds Ten lakh Rupees, then appeal lies to this Court as per Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964 read with Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended by Mysore Amendment Act 17 of 1961.
In the present batch of cases, as already noticed by us above, MFA Nos. 5446/2009, 5447/2009 and 5448/2009, are preferred by the beneficiary of acquisition aggrieved by the award passed by the Reference Court. Even then, the claim made by the claimants seeking compensation as per Section 18 will determine the Appellate Forum. Unfortunately, none of these Appellants have made available copy of the claim petition/reference petition. The judgment and award passed by the Court below also do not indicate the value of the subject-matter of their claim or the amount claimed by the claimants. In the circumstances, the Appellants are directed to produce the claim/reference petitions along with the Memo of Valuation valuing the appeal for the purpose of jurisdiction in the light of the law laid down above, before the Registry within three weeks from today, whereupon the Registry shall examine the same and register the appeals if the value of the subject-matter in the claim made as per the Reference Petition is more than Ten Lakh Rupees. If the same is found to be less than Ten Lakh Rupees, then the Registry shall post these appeals for appropriate further orders before the learned single Judge.
As regards MFA No. 422/2010 which is filed by the Applicants who wanted to come on record in the proceedings before the Reference Court commenced on the reference made u/s 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, wherein the Civil Court has passed the judgment and order holding that they are not entitled for any share in the amount deposited before the Court by the Land Acquisition Officer, the jurisdiction of the Appellate Forum depends on the value of their share which they have claimed before the Reference Court. The Appellants have not furnished the copy of the application/claim petition filed in this regard either before the Land Acquisition Officer or before the Reference Court. Depending on the value of their share in the compensation amount which is the subject-matter of reference u/s 30, the jurisdiction of the Appellate Forum has to be determined. Hence, the Appellants therein have to furnish their claim petition/ application disclosing the extent of share claimed by them in the compensation amount. If the share claimed by the Appellants exceeds Rupees Ten Lakhs, then only the appeal is maintainable before this Court. The Registry shall verify the same and take appropriate action. If the value of the share of the Appellants in the amount of compensation deposited before the Court below is less than Rupees Ten Lakhs, then the Registry shall post the appeals before the learned single Judge for appropriate further orders.
The Reference made is accordingly answered.
The interim orders already granted in these appeals shall continue to operate until further orders.
