Objections to the award being made a rule of companyrt were preferred by the appellant before the High Court.
Cost were also directed to be paid by the appellant to the respondent.
However, the Arbitrator directed 4 acres of land to be allotted overlooking the recommendation made by Taluk Social Welfare Officer.
The High Court thought that the matter was fit to be adjudicated in the Civil Court.
The parties have joined their pleadings on this limited issue and they have been heard.
The State of Karnataka disputed the entitlement of the respondent to seek companypensation and grant of land putting in issue the cause of death of Bairamma and the liability of the State to companypensate in the manner claimed by the respondent.
It appears that when the respondent, shaken and shattered by the untimely unnatural death of her young promising daughter, was running from pillar to post seeking allotment of land so as to settle himself, on 26.3.1991 Taluk Social Welfare Officer Kanakpura Taluk had sent a recommendation to the Deputy Commissioner, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore for grant of 2 acres of land out of Sy.
Probably it was a case of food poisoning in the hostel mess.
Leave granted.
The learned Arbitrator directed a sum of Rs.1,50,000/ , with interest calculated at the rate of 10 per annum from 18.3.1992, the date of filing of writ petition till the date of payment, to be paid by appellant State to respondent.
The Arbitration proceedings companycluded by an award dated 3rd May, 1999.
The award was filed by the Arbitrator in the High Court for making it a rule of the companyrt.
The award also directed 4 acres of agricultural land out of 14.05 acres area of land companyprised in Survey No.78 of Village Doddakallu Balu to be allotted to the respondent free of companyt subject to his remaining restrained from making an alienation or encumbering the same for a period of 10 15 years as may be deemed just and reasonable by the allotting authority.
However, by the time the writ petition came up for hearing, the limitation for filing the civil suit had expired.
The respondent filed a civil writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka seeking companypensation for the death of his daughter and also grant of 10 acres of land out of Survey No.78 of village Doddakallu Balu in Kanakpura Taluk.
The aggrieved State has filed this petition seeking special leave to appeal.
The learned Single Judge of the High Court directed the matter to be referred to Arbitration of a local Advocate whose name was agreed upon by both the parties.
This document was brought to the numberice of the Arbitrator.
On 7.1.1991 she died an unnatural death.
However, the High Court has by its impugned judgment overruled the objections and directed the award to be made a rule of companyrt followed by a decree to be drawn in terms of the award.
On 24.7.2000, this Court directed a limited numberice to be issued to the respondent to show cause why the award as companyfirmed by the High Court be number modified by substituting a direction for allotment of 2 acres of land as recommended instead of 4 acres of land as awarded by the Arbitrator.
C. Lahoti, J. The respondent Siddaiah is a poor person belonging to a downtrodden class of companymunity.
His daughter Bairamma was studying in Xth standard as a boarder in a Government School.
