Karnataka High Court
St. Philomina Girls High School vs Assistant Commissioner And on 13 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB
M.F.A. No.457/2019
C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.457/2019 (LAC)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3803/2017 (LAC)
IN M.F.A. No.457/2019:
BETWEEN:
ST. PHILOMINA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL
AND P.U. COLLEGE
Digitally signed REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL
by SISTER JASMIN @ JASINTHA KOREYA
ARSHIFA BAHAR AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
KHANAM ST. PHILOMINA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL
HIGH COURT OF AND P.U. COLLEGE, HOLENARASIPURA ROAD
KARNATAKA HASSAN - 573201.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GIRISH B. BALADARE, ADV.,)
AND:
1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
HASSAN SUB-DIVISION
HASSAN - 573201.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB
M.F.A. No.457/2019
C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017
HC-KAR
2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
P.W.D. HASSAN DIVISION
HASSAN - 573201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RADHA RAMASWAMY, AGA)
**********
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.04.2016
PASSED IN LAC NO.379/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT HASSAN AND ENHANCED THE
COMPENSATION WITH INTEREST, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY & ETC.
IN M.F.A. NO.3803/2017:
BETWEEN:
1. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
HASSAN SUB-DIVISION
HASSAN-573201.
2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
HASSAN DIVISION
HASSAN-573201.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. RADHA RAMASWAMY, AGA)
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB
M.F.A. No.457/2019
C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017
HC-KAR
AND:
ST. PHILOMINA GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL
AND P.U. COLLEGE
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL
SISTER JASMIN @ JASINTHA KOREYA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
ST. PHILOMINA
GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL AND P.U.COLLEGE
HOLENARASIPURA ROAD
HASSAN-573201.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. GIRISH B. BALADARE, ADV.,)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS
IN LAC NO.379/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN. SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.04.2016 PAVED IN LAC
NO.379/2014, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
ON 06.02.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB
M.F.A. No.457/2019
C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017
HC-KAR
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) MFA.No.3803/2017 is filed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Land Acquisition Officer, Hassan and another. MFA.No.457/2019 is filed by the claimant.
Both the appeals arise out of the judgment and award dated 23.04.2016 passed in LAC.No.397/2014 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hassan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court').
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of these appeals are that the claimant is the owner of the school building in khata bearing No.721 measuring 11823.6 sq. ft. situated at Holenarasipura Road, Hassan. The State Government issued the preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 30.12.2005 with an intention to acquire the land which was followed by a final declaration. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 20.02.2010 by determining the market value of the -5- NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR acquired land and building at Rs.49,63,914/-. The claimant sought the reference under Section 18 of the Act. The claimant adduced the oral and documentary evidence by examining two witnesses PW-1 and PW-2 and got marked documents at Exs.P1 to P29. The respondents did not adduce any evidence. The Reference Court, under the impugned judgment, re-determined the market value of the land at Rs.2000/- per sq. ft. with statutory benefits and interest and awarded compensation of Rs.18,39,759/- towards the cost for construction of new building. Being aggrieved, these appeals are filed.
3. The learned Additional Government Advocate for the appellant submits that the Reference Court, without properly appreciating the evidence on record has determined the market value at Rs.2000/- per sq. ft. mainly relying on the judgment and award passed in LAC.No.45/2010, which is impermissible. It is submitted that the distance between the land in question and land involved in LAC.No.45/2010 is more than 60-70 meters. -6-
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR Hence, the same cannot be the basis to determine the market value for awarding compensation. It is further submitted that the lands covered in these appeals are situated in Holenarasipura Road and the lands covered in LAC No.45/2010 is situated at B.M.Road. It is also submitted that no acceptable evidence was placed before the Reference Court to enhance the market value. However, the Reference Court has erroneously enhanced the compensation. It is contended that the award of compensation is also contrary to law. The Reference Court failed to take note of the fact that the claimant has carried out construction without leaving any set back and the award of compensation to the structure by the land acquisition officer is proper which needs to be confirmed. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal of the State.
4. Sri.Girish B.Baladare, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/claimant submits that the Reference Court has erred in appreciating the evidence on record and has awarded meager compensation. It is submitted that -7- NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR the acquired land is for expansion of Highway which itself make it clear that the cost of the land is very high and further, the Reference Court erred in awarding 50% of the value of the structure as the cost of construction has substantially increased from the date of acquisition, demolition till putting up of the construction. It is further submitted that the Reference Court ought to have considered Ex.P12 and ought to have awarded compensation at Rs.7000/- per sq. ft. He seeks to enhance the compensation of the land and structure by dismissing the appeal.
5. We have heard the arguments of the learned Additional Government Advocate for the appellant-State, the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Trial Court record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced by both the sides.
-8-
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR
6. The point that arises for our consideration in this appeal is :
"Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court calls for any interference?"
7. The answer to the above point is in the affirmative for the following reasons:
(a) The pleadings and evidence on record indicate the land and building of the claimant situated in khata bearing No.721 measuring 11823.6 sq. ft. at Holenarasipura Road, Hassan, was acquired under Section 4(1) of the Act under the preliminary notification dated 30.12.2005 followed by the final declaration of the State government. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 20.02.2010 by determining the market value of the acquired land and building at Rs.49,63,914/-. The claimant sought the reference under Section 18 of the Act.
The claimant adduced the oral and documentary evidence by examining two witnesses PW-1 and PW-2 and got -9- NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR marked Exs.P1 to P29. The respondents-State did not adduce any evidence. The Reference Court, under the impugned judgment, re-determined the market value of the land at Rs.2000/- per sq. ft. with statutory benefits and interest and awarded compensation of Rs.18,39,759/- towards the cost of construction of new building.
b) The evidence of PW-1 indicates that the land is acquired for widening of the road and in the acquired land, there existed a school building from the last 60 years and the said property is situated within the heart of the Hassan city. It is deposed that the compound wall and the portion of the structure has been demolished for widening of the road. It is further deposed that 1560 sq. ft. of the built up area has been demolished and 11823.6 sq. ft. of land has been acquired. It is also deposed that the acquired land is situated within 60-70 mtrs. from the heart of Hassan city. The claimant got marked Exs.P1 to P29. Exs.P1 to P10 are the undisputed documentary evidence on record, award notice, acquisition notification, khata extract,
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR measurement statement, sketch, photographs. Exs.P12 to P27 are the certified copies of the judgments passed by the Reference Court in similar cases and photographs. Exs.P28 and P29 are the building valuation list and the general award.
c) Learned counsel for the claimant has contended that the Reference Court ought to have awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per sq. ft. by considering Ex.P12. A perusal of Ex.P12 indicates that the Reference Court enhanced the compensation of the acquired land and awarded the same at Rs.7,000/- per sq. ft. Ex.P12 also indicates that the land was acquired by the respondents-State under the preliminary notification dated 18.11.2005 and the said land is situated on B.M.Road, Gandhibazar, Hassan. In the case on hand, the preliminary notification was issued on 30.12.2005. It is not in dispute that the acquisition in the case on hand and the acquisition in the case at Ex.P12 are of the same year and the distance between the two lands is approximately
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR 60-70 mtrs. as is evident from the oral and documentary evidence placed on record by the claimant. The Reference Court, though provided an opportunity to the respondents- State to disprove the assertion of the claimant with regard to the market value, the respondents-State failed to discharge the burden by adducing the evidence. We have also taken judicial note of the fact that the property is close to Hassan Bus Stand, Court complex, etc. The Co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of LAKSHMEGOWDA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS1 and SANNEGOWDA 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 1 MFA No.8703/2018 dt. 25.09.21 2 MFA No.8760/2018 dt. 24.09.21 3 (2010) 5 SCC 747
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR land owners to pay more compensation to some of the land owners and less compensation to the others. Hence, this Court, considering the reasoning of the Reference Court in LAC No.28/2010 dated 04.10.2014 at Ex.P12, is of the considered view that the acquired property in this appeal and the property covered in LAC No.28/2010 are having similar potentiality, situated within the city limits and are required to be treated alike by awarding similar compensation.
d) The learned Additional Government Advocate contends that they have filed an application for production of the additional documents and along with the said application, they have produced a number of documents and if those documents are considered, the appeal of the State is required to be allowed. We have perused the application filed by the State under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The affidavit accompanying the said application does not fulfill the essential ingredient of Rule 27 of Order XLI of the CPC. Be
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR that as it may, the documents produced along with the application are the sale deeds of the years 2003 and 2015-
16. A perusal of the schedules to the said sale deeds indicate that they are of the different area of the same Hassan town. We are of the considered view that this Court cannot be expected to consider such sale deeds and arrive at a conclusion in determining the market value of the land in question. Hence, the additional evidence produced by the appellant-State would not help them in any way, more so when there is a judgment and award of the Reference Court with regard to the similarly situated land acquired in the same year. Hence, the contention advanced by the appellant-State does not merit consideration.
e) The Reference Court has determined the compensation of Rs.57,50,000/- for the structures demolished and out of the said amount, 50% was deducted towards depreciation and awarded the remaining amount. The said reasoning of the Reference Court is
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR based on the building valuation list at Ex.P28 and after considering the oral evidence of PW-2 and taking note that the structure is 60 years old, we do not find any error or perversity in the finding recorded by the Reference Court insofar as the award of compensation with regard to the structure is concerned.
8. For the preceding analysis, we are of the considered view that the appellant-claimant is entitled to the compensation at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per sq. ft. as against Rs.2,000/- awarded by the Reference Court. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER MFA No.457/2019 is allowed-in-part with costs. The impugned judgment and award dated 23.4.2016 passed in LAC No.379/2014 by the Reference Court is modified by re-determining the market value of the land at Rs.7,000/- per sq. ft. with all statutory benefits and interest. The impugned judgment and award insofar as award of compensation for structure/building is upheld.
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:9087-DB M.F.A. No.457/2019 C/W M.F.A. No.3803/2017 HC-KAR MFA No.3803/2017 is dismissed. Registry to draw award accordingly.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 3 Sl No.: 2