<p>The Supreme Court has ordered for paying enhanced compensation of Rs 10 lakh per acre to lands acquired for the Hubballi-Ankola railway line.</p>.<p>A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant set aside the Karnataka High Court order of November 24, 2008, that had reduced the compensation amount from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 5.1 lakh per acre.</p>.<p>The court, however, directed that the appellant Ningappa Thotappa Angadi, through legal representatives and others, would not be entitled to any interest on the enhanced compensation and statutory amount for the period of delay of 2,928 days in filing the appeals.</p>.<p>The top court passed its order after having noted that it had granted similar relief to other people on November 11, 2016, in the case.</p>.<p>"The appellants are also similarly placed claimants. They are, thus, entitled to seek parity and claim the same amount of fair and just compensation as has been awarded to other land owners," the bench said.</p>.<p>In the matter, the HC had reduced compensation on a plea by the land acquisition officer, who contended that the acquired land was actually ‘dry land’ and so, other modes for determining its current market value should have been applied.</p>.<p>The top court, however, preferred to restore the compensation awarded by the reference court-cum-principal civil judge, Hubballi.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court has ordered for paying enhanced compensation of Rs 10 lakh per acre to lands acquired for the Hubballi-Ankola railway line.</p>.<p>A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant set aside the Karnataka High Court order of November 24, 2008, that had reduced the compensation amount from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 5.1 lakh per acre.</p>.<p>The court, however, directed that the appellant Ningappa Thotappa Angadi, through legal representatives and others, would not be entitled to any interest on the enhanced compensation and statutory amount for the period of delay of 2,928 days in filing the appeals.</p>.<p>The top court passed its order after having noted that it had granted similar relief to other people on November 11, 2016, in the case.</p>.<p>"The appellants are also similarly placed claimants. They are, thus, entitled to seek parity and claim the same amount of fair and just compensation as has been awarded to other land owners," the bench said.</p>.<p>In the matter, the HC had reduced compensation on a plea by the land acquisition officer, who contended that the acquired land was actually ‘dry land’ and so, other modes for determining its current market value should have been applied.</p>.<p>The top court, however, preferred to restore the compensation awarded by the reference court-cum-principal civil judge, Hubballi.</p>
