Karnataka High Court
B A Thimmegowda vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 15 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB
M.F.A. No.8694/2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8694/2018 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
S/O APPAJIGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.
SINCE DEAD BY LR'S.
1. B.T. SURESHA
S/O LATE B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
by RUPA V C/O B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
SRI. LAKSHMI VENKATESHWARA NILAYA
Location: High 110 FEET RING ROAD
Court of NEAR BRILLIANT COLLAGE
karnataka BEHIND G.U.K. BAR
HEMAVATHI NAGARA
HASSAN - 573201.
2. JAYAMMA
D/O LATE B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
W/O K.P. RAJEGOWDA
R/AT. NEAR THARA HOSPETEL
VINAYAKA NAGARA, ARKALGUD
HASSAN - 573201.
3. RAMACHANDRA B.T.
S/O LATE B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/AT. KATTAYA HOBLI
BACHIHALLI, KITTANE
HASSAN - 573201.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB
M.F.A. No.8694/2018
HC-KAR
4. B.T. SOMASHEKAR
S/O LATE B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
R/AT. BACHIHALLI, KATTAYA HOBLI
HASSAN - 573201.
5. B.T. KUMARASWAMY
S/O LATE B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
R/AT. BACHIHALLI, KITTANE
HASSAN 573201.
6 B.T. SATHISHA
S/O LATE B.A. THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
R/AT. 235 D, VINAYAKA NAGAR
2ND CROSS, ARKALGUD
HASSAN - 573201.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. CHETHAN B, ADV.,)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
H.R.P.-II, HASSAN-573201
HASSAN DISTRICT
2. GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE - 560001.
3. CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD.,
BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
YAGACHI PROJECT DIVISION
BELUR,
HASSAN DIVISION - 573201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PRATHIBHA R.K. AGA FOR R1 & R2
SRI. B.R. PRASHANTH, ADV., FOR R3)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB
M.F.A. No.8694/2018
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAC ACT, PRAYING TO CALL
FOR THE RECORDS IN LAC NO.184/2014 BY THE II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HASSAN. MODIFY AND
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AWARDED IN JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 04.07.2015 PASSED IN LAC NO.184/2014 BY THE II
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HASSAN & ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 04.07.2015 passed in LAC No.184/2014 by the Court of the II Additional Senior Civil Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court') seeking for higher compensation.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Reference Court.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the claimant's land measuring 33 guntas in Survey No.45/1 situated at Bhachihalli Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District, was acquired by the respondents for the purpose of the Yagachi Reservoir Project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) determined the market value of the land at Rs.55,800/- per acre. Upon reference, the Reference Court re- determined the market value at Rs.20,500/- per gunta along with all statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant has filed this appeal seeking higher compensation.
4. Sri.Chethan B., learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Reference Court has committed a grave error in determining the market value of the land in question without considering the evidence on record. It is submitted that this Court in MFA No. 10457/2018 c/w MFA No.10456/2018 and in MFA Nos.8760/2018, MFA No.1475/2018, has already enhanced the market value of -5- NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR the similarly situated lands at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. The lands referred in the aforesaid appeals and the land in question are located in same Hobli and were acquired for the same purpose i.e., for Yagachi Reservior Project, and the lands are identical and similar in nature. Hence, he seeks to re-determine the market value of the land in question at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with all statutory benefits.
5. Per contra, Sri.B.R.Prashanth, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and Smt.Prathiksha R.K., learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 support the impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court and submit that the determination of the market value by the Reference Court is just and does not call for any enhancement. Hence, they seek to dismiss the appeal.
6. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the claimants, the learned Additional -6- NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR Government Advocate, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced on both side. The point that would arises for consideration in this appeals is "Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court calls for any interference?"
7. The undisputed facts in this appeal are that the claimant's land measuring 33 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 situated at Bhachihalli Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District was acquired for the purpose of Yagachi Reservoir project vide preliminary notification dated 05.02.2009 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and final notification dated 16.11.2009 issued under Section 6(1) of the Act. The SLAO passed the award on 02.12.2011 by determining the market value of the land in -7- NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR question at Rs.55,800/- per acre with all statutory benefits.
8. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of SANNEGOWDA vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS1 and KUPPEGOWDA vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS2, has considered the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA vs. BAL RAM AND ANOTHER3 and held that when the acquired lands are more or less situated nearby, when the acquired lands are identical and similar and acquired for the same purpose, it would be unfair to discriminate between the land owners to pay more compensation to some of the land owners and less compensation to the others. The Bench has also recorded that the said view is reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in subsequent decision of ALI MOHAMMAD BEIGH 1 MFA.No.8760/2018 dated 24.09.2021 2 MFA.No.10457/2018 c/w MFA.No.10456/2018 dated 05.02.2025 3 (2010) 5 SCC 747 -8- NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR AND OTHERS vs. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR4 and re-determined the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. In the aforesaid cases, the preliminary notifications for acquisition were issued in the years 2008, 2009, and 2010, whereas in the present appeal, the preliminary notification was issued on 05.02.2009. The acquisition in all these cases was undertaken for the same public purpose and pertains to lands situated within the same Hobli, i.e. Kattaya Hobli. Though the notifications were issued on different dates, the nature of the lands and their potentiality remain identical. The lands involved in the earlier cases and the land under acquisition in the present appeal are similar and identical in nature and are from same Hobli. Therefore, by applying the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decisions, we are of the considered view that the land loser in the present appeal is also entitled to the same benefits, including the enhanced market value and statutory entitlements, as granted in the earlier connected matters.
4(2017) 4 SCC 717 -9- NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR
9. It is also not in dispute that the judgments of the co-ordinate Bench referred supra have attained finality and there is no challenge to the said judgments either by the State Government or by the respondent No.3- beneficiary of the acquisition.
10. Considering the fact that the land covered in this appeal and the lands covered in the aforesaid judgments are identical and similar, acquired for the same purpose, it would be unfair to discriminate the land owners. Hence, we are of the considered view that the appeal deserves to be allowed by re-determining the compensation at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with all statutory benefits and interest as per the provisions of the Act.
11. For the aforementioned reasons, appeal is allowed with costs.
12. The market value of the land measuring 33 guntas in Sy.No.45/1 situated at Bhachihalli Village,
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:40796-DB M.F.A. No.8694/2018 HC-KAR Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District is re- determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK/BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2