Karnataka High Court
The Union Of India vs Kalyani And Ors on 20 August, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4789
MSA No. 200074 of 2018
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO. 200074 OF 2018 (LA)
BETWEEN:
THE UNION OF INDIA,
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
CENTRAL RAILWAY, PUNE,
(MAHARASHTRA STATE)
REPRESENTED BY R.N.GUPTA,
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CENTRAL RAILWAY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KALYANI
Digitally signed
by RENUKA S/O SIDDAPPA DANDIN,
Location: HIGH AGED: 62 YEARS,
COURT OF R/O: NANDUR VILLAGE,
KARNATAKA TQ: DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 103.
2. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER & LAO,
SEDAM SUB-DIVISION,
SEDAM DIST: KALABURAGI- 585 103.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA,
STATION ROAD, KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.K.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI VEERANAGOUDA R.MALIPATIL, H.C.G.P., FOR R2 AND R3)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4789
MSA No. 200074 of 2018
HC-KAR
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 54 (2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 28.11.2016 PASSED BY LEARNED III
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE KALABURAGI IN LACA
NO.129/2012 AND CONFIRM THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 28.06.2007 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIVIL JUDGE
(SR.DN), SEDAM, IN LAC NO.463/2002, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL, COMING ON
FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This second appeal is filed praying to set aside
the Judgment and award dated 28.11.2016 passed by III
Additional District Judge, Kalaburagi (for short 'the appellate
Court') in LACA No.129/2012 and confirm the Judgment and
award dated 28.06.2007 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.),
Sedam, (for short 'the Reference Court') in LAC
No.463/2002.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the
appellant/beneficiary, learned counsel for the respondent
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4789
HC-KAR
No.1/claimant and learned High Court Government Pleader
for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
3. The land bearing Survey No.41/2, measuring 2
acres 33 guntas of Martur village of Chittapur taluk, was
acquired by the State for the purpose of 'Double Railway
Track' for the appellant by issuing 4(1) Notification dated
31.05.1990. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has fixed
the compensation of Rs.5,500/- per acre for the dry land.
The respondent No.1 dissatisfied with the award amount has
submitted a Protest Petition under Section 18(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, before the respondent No.2 seeking
reference to Civil Court for enhancement of compensation.
The petition filed by respondent No.1 was referred to
Reference Court i.e. Senior Civil Judge, Sedam, for enquiry
and decision. The Reference Court after enquiry and
appreciating the evidence on record, has determined the
market value at the rate of Rs.7,200/- per acre with all
statutory benefits. The respondent No.1 challenged the said
Judgment/award of the Reference Court in LACA
No.129/2012 before the appellate Court. The appellate Court
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4789
HC-KAR
after hearing the arguments and re-appreciating the
evidence on record, has enhanced the market value to
Rs.85,480/- per acre as against Rs.7,200/- per acre awarded
by the Reference Court with all statutory benefits. Aggrieved
by the said Judgment of the appellate Court, the beneficiary
has filed the present appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend
that, the acquisition notification has been issued on
31.05.1990 and the price of the yield has been taken by the
appellate Court for the year 1990-1991, but it ought to have
taken the price of the yield for the year 1989-1990. With
this, he prays to allow the appeal and reduce the market
value as fixed by the appellate Court.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1/claimant
would contend that, the market value fixed by the appellate
Court is proper and correct.
6. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court has
perused the impugned Judgment and the trial Court records.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4789
HC-KAR
7. The land of the respondent No.1/claimant has
been acquired under notification dated 31.05.1990.
Considering the said aspect, the yield for the year 1989-
1990 has to be taken into consideration. The appellate Court
has taken the price of the yield for the year 1990-1991 and
it is not proper and correct. The price-list marked at Ex.P.3
indicates that, the maximum price of Jawar is Rs.380/- for
the year 1989-1990 per quintal and Rs.878/- as price of
Toor. The appellate Court has rightly taken four cart loads of
Jawar fodder at the rate of Rs.250/- per cart load.
Considering the said aspect, the computation of the market
value of the land of respondent No.1 is as follows:
1 Jawar 6 quintals X Rs.380/- Rs.2,280/-
2 Toor 8 quitals X Rs.838/- Rs.7,024/-
Total Rs.9,304/-
3 Less 40% cultivation charges Rs.3,721/-
Total Rs.5,583/-
4 Jawar Fodder 4 X Rs.250/- Rs.1,000/-
Total Rs.6,583/-
5 Multiplier of 10 X 10
Market value Rs.65,830/-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4789
HC-KAR
8. In view of the above, the market value fixed by
the appellate Court at Rs.85,480/- per acre, requires to be
reduced to Rs.65,830/- per acre.
9. In the result, the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part;
(ii) The Judgment and award of the first appellate
Court passed in LACA No.129/2012 dated
28.11.2016 is modified only to the extent of
market value;
(iii) The market value as fixed by the appellate
Court at Rs.85,480/- per acre has been
reduced to Rs.65,830/- per acre;
(iv) The respondent No.1/claimant is entitle to
compensation at the rate of Rs.65,830/- per
acre with all statutory benefits.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
SVH
