High CourtDivision BenchAppeal disposed of.

GEN. MANAGER, MIS. HUTTI GOLD MINES CO. v. SHIVAPPA (D) THR. HIS LRS. AND ORS.

Case / Petition Number:Civil Appeal No. 840 of 2007
Neutral Citation:2007 (2) SCR 804

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court
Hon'ble Judges
  • Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan
  • Al Tamas Kabir
Judgment Date
2007-02-19
Court Decision / Holding
The Supreme Court modified the High Court’s order by directing the appellant to deposit 50% of the enhanced amount along with proportionate solatium, additional market value, and interest within four weeks. On such deposit, claimants are entitled to withdraw 25% of the enhanced amount without any security. The remaining 25% is to be kept in a fixed deposit in a Nationalised Bank, and a separate account is to be opened for all claimants in the Reference Court with further orders from the High Court, awaiting disposal of the appeals. The Court directed expeditious disposal of the proceedings within six months and disposed of the appeal with no costs.
Final Disposition
Appeal disposed of.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Gen. Manager, MIS. Hutti Gold Mines Co.

Respondents

  • Shivappa (D) Thr. His LRs. and Ors.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Gopal Subramaniam
  • • Mukul Rohtagi
  • • Lalit Mohini Bhat
  • • Anitha Shenoy
  • • Naveen R. Nath

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Dhruv Mehta
  • • Harshvardhan Jha
  • • Yashraj Singh Deora

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Supreme Court decision concerns an appeal arising from land acquisition proceedings in Karnataka where the High Court had stayed the operation and execution of an award, subject to the applicant depositing 50% of the enhanced compensation along with proportionate solatium, additional market value and interest, with claimants given liberty to withdraw the deposited sums. The appellant challenged this stay direction, and the respondents acted as claimants in the dispute. The apex Court observed that while it would not express an opinion on the merits, the High Court’s order mandating a 50% deposit with withdrawal rights required modification. The Court directed the appellant to deposit 50% of the enhanced amount along with the proportionate sums within four weeks, and held that upon such deposit, all claimants are entitled to withdraw 25% of the enhanced amount without furnishing any security. The remaining 25% was to be kept in a fixed deposit in a nationalised bank, with the Reference Court maintaining a separate account for all claimants and awaiting further orders from the High Court. The bench urged expeditious disposal of the appeals, requesting that merits be decided within six months. The appeal was disposed of with no costs.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellants contended that the High Court’s stay order directing deposit of 50% of the enhanced compensation should be modified; upon deposit, claimants should be allowed to withdraw portions of the enhanced amount, with a view to protecting the promoter’s interests and ensuring timely disposal of the appeals. They urged that funds be managed to safeguard the appellant while expediting adjudication, and requested a defined time-frame for disposal by the High Court.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contended that the High Court rightly stayed operation of the award subject to deposit, and that the deposit and withdrawal framework adequately protected the claimants’ interests while preserving a path to expeditious adjudication. They supported timely disposition of the appeals and urged adherence to procedural safeguards. The proceedings acknowledged the long pendency since 1995 and emphasized orderly management of compensation funds during the interim period.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against GEN. MANAGER, MIS. HUTTI GOLD MINES CO. v. SHIVAPPA (D) THR. HIS LRS. AND ORS. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

A B F G H GEN. MANAGER, _MIS._ HUTII GOLD MINES CO. _v._ SHIVAPPA (D) THR. HIS LRS. AND ORS. FEBRUARY 19, 2007 [DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.] ## _Land Acquisition:_ \ _Execution of award passed in Land Acquisition proceedings-Stay by_[• ] c _High Court subject to appellant depositing 50% of enhanced compensation amount alongwith proportionate amounts towards solatium, additional market value and the interest thereon and claimants given liberty to withdraw the same-Challenge to-Held: Order of High Court needs modification-On deposit of 50% of the enhanced amounts, claimants permitted to withdraw_ D _[25% without furnishing security-Remaining 25% ][to ][be kepi ][in ][fixed deposit ] 0of Nationalized Bank._ The High Court while admitting appeals stayed the operation and execution of the award passed in Land Acquisition proceedings subject to the appellant depositing 50% of the enhanced compensation amount alongwith E[the proportionate amounts towards solatium, additional market value and the ] interest thereon with the Reference Court and on such deposit being made, granted liberty to Respondent-claimants to withdraw the same. Hence the present appeal challenging_ the said direction of High Court. ' ## Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: The order of the High Court ordering deposit of 50% of the enhanced amount with liberty to withdraw needs modification. The appellant is directed to deposit 50% of the enhanced amount along with the proportionate amounts towards solatium, additional market value and the interest thereon with the Reference Court. On ~uch deposit, all the claimants are entitled to withdraw 25% of the enhanced amount without f~rnishing any security. The Reference Court shall open a separate account in respect of all the claimants and keep 25% of the remaining amount in fixed deposit in a Nationalised Bank and await further orders from the High Court in the pending appeal. [Para 5) [806-A, B, CJ ## .. 804 GEN. MANAGER. ~VS. HUTTI GOLD MINES CO.>. SHIVAPPA (DI THR. HIS LRS. [LAKSl1't4NAN, J.] 805 _, CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION _:_ Civil Appeal No. 840 of 2007. A From the interims Order dated 11.1.2007 of the High Court of Court of Kamataka at Bangalore in M.F.A. No. 3707/2006. Gopal Subramaniam, Mukul Rohtagi, Lalit Mohini Bhat, Anitha Shenoy and Naveen R. Nath for the Appellants. Dhruv Mehta, Harshvardhan Jha and Yashraj Singh Deora for the Respondents. The Judgm<!nt of the Court was delivered by c **DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J.** 1. Heard Mr.Gopal Subramaniam, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-claimants. 2. Leave granted. D 3. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the High Court of Karnataka in M.F.A.No.3707/2006 and other connected matters. The High Court of Karnataka by order dt.11.01.2007 while admitting the appeals has passed the following interim order:- "This Court doth Order that pending admission of the above E appeal the operation and execution of the impugned award in LAC Nos. 1,2,31.3,4,32,5,6,7,33,34,8,35,37,9,10 of2001 dated 19.12.2006 and LAC Nos.22,23, 13,24,17,26,18,27, 19, 14,28,20,29, 15m 30 of 200 I dated 03.01.2006 on the file of the Addi.Civil Judge (Sr.On.) Raichur is hereby stayed subject to the appellant depositing 50% of the enhanced F amounts along with the proportionate amounts towards solatium, additional market value and the interest thereon within four weeks from today i.e. 11.01.2007 with the reference Court. On such deposit being made, it is open to the claimants to draw the same.". 4. Aggrieved against the direction to deposit 50% of the enhanced G amount along with the proportionate amounts towards solatium, additional market value and the interest thereon, the appellant through its General Manager preferred the above Civil Appeal arising out ofSLP(C) No.2471/2007. 5. We have perused the grounds of appeal and also heard the arguments advanced by learned ASIJ for the appellant and learned counsel for the **H** _J_ ' 806 SUPREME COURT REPORTS .[2007] 2 S.C.R. - A respondents. Since the appeal is pending before the High Court, we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims. However, in our opinion, the order of the High Court ordering deposit of 50% of the enhanced amount with liberty to withdraw needs modification. We, therefore, direct the appellant herein to deposit 50% of the enhanced amount along with the - B proportionate amounts towards solatium, additional market value and the interest thereon within four weeks from today with the Reference Court. On such deposit, all the claimants are entitled to withdraw 25% of the enhanced amount without furnishing any security. The Reference Court shall open a separate account in respect of all the claimants and keep 25% of the remaining amount in fixed deposit in a natior;ialised bank and await further orders from - C the High Court in the pending appeal. Since the acquisition proceedings started in the year 1995 and the matter is pending in one forum or the other we request the High Court to dispose of the appeals filed by the appellant herein ar.d also the appeals filed by the respondents herein/claimants within six months from today on merits and in accordance with law. We request the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court to place all the matters - D before a Division Bench of the said court for disposal of the same within the time stipulated in this Order. - ' - 6. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 7. No costs. E B.B.B. Appeals disposed of. L