Karnataka High Court

Sri.A.R.Krishnegowda vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2025

                                          -1-
                                                      NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB
                                                    M.F.A. No.6900/2017
                                                C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                     DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
                                       PRESENT
                      THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                                         AND
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6900/2017 (LAC)
                                         C/W
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6901/2017 (LAC)
              IN M.F.A. NO.6900/2017:

              BETWEEN:

                 SRI. A.B. LAKSHMEGOWDA
                 S/O LATE BELUREGOWDA
Digitally signed AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS
by RUPA V
                 R/AT. ADDIHALLI VILLAGE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF         SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI
KARNATAKA        HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-572101.
                                                              ...APPELLANT
              (BY SRI. RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV.,)
              AND:

              1.    STATE OF KARNATAKA
                    REP. BY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                    HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT-II
                    OFFICE AT D C OFFICE BUILDING
                    HASSAN-572101.

              2.    EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
                    CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA
                    HOLENARASIPURA
                    HASSAN-572101.
                                                           ...RESPONDENTS
              (BY SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1
                  SRI. PRASHANTH B.R. ADV., FOR R2)
                            -2-
                                     NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB
                                     M.F.A. No.6900/2017
                                 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017



     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 2ND
JUNE 2015 IN LAC NO.157/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT
OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT HASSAN,
BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION UP TO 61,72,720/- AND
GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE
COURT MAY DEEM FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF
THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.


IN M.F.A. NO.6901/2017:

BETWEEN:

SRI. A.R. KRISHNEGOWDA
S/O RAMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/AT. ADDIHALLI VILLAGE
SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI
HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-572101.
                                             ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV.,)


AND:

1.   STATE OF KARNATAKA
     REP. BY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
     HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT-II
     OFFICE AT D C OFFICE BUILDING
     HASSAN-572101.

2.   EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
     CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA
     HOLENARASIPURA
     HASSAN-572101.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1
   SMT. SUNITA SRINIVAS, ADV., FOR R2)
                           ---
                              -3-
                                        NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB
                                        M.F.A. No.6900/2017
                                    C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017




     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, SET
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 5TH
MARCH 2015 IN LAC NO.52/20123 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT
OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT HASSAN,
BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE
AFORESAID CASE UP TO 17,45,855/- AND GRANT SUCH OTHER
ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM
FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, 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)

MFA No.6900/2017 is filed by the appellant under

Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(hereinafter referred to as 'the LA Act') being aggrieved by

the judgment and award dated 02.06.2015 passed in LAC

No.157/2012 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and

JMFC, Hassan.

MFA No.6901/2017 is filed by the appellant under

Section 54(1) of the Act being aggrieved by the judgment

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

and award dated 05.03.2015 passed in LAC No.52/2013

by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan.

2. Heard Sri.Rajaram Sooryambail, learned

counsel for the appellants and Sri.Prashanth B.R, learned

counsel for the respondent No.2 and the learned High

Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

the issue involved in both the appeals arise out of the

same preliminary notification and acquisition is the same

purpose. It is submitted that the lands of the appellants

were acquired for the purpose of Kamasamudra Lift

Irrigation project. It is further submitted that the

Reference Court, without appreciating the evidence on

record has determined the market value at Rs.32,000/-

per gunta. It is also submitted that another Reference

Court in LAC No.58/2016 c/w LAC Nos.43/2016 and

49/2016 has determined the market value of the land at

Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. In the said case, the preliminary

notification was issued on 21.09.2006 and in the instant

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

appeals, the preliminary notification was issued on

02.08.2007 which is one year later. Hence, the appellants

herein are also entitled to the compensation of

Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. He seeks to allow the appeals.

4. Per contra, Sri.Prashanth B.R., learned counsel

for the respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment

and award of the Reference Court and submits that the

Reference Court has determined the market value based

on the evidence available on record which does not call for

any interference. It is further submitted that the

judgment passed in LAC No.58/2016 and connected

matters of the Reference Court cannot be relied on, to

determine the market value. In support of his

contentions, he placed reliance on the decision of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MANOJ KUMAR

AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS1.

It is also submitted that the appellants are required to

adduce evidence to prove the market value of the lands in

(2018) 13 SCC 96

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

question. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeals.

Learned High Court Government Pleader supports the

judgment of the Reference Court and seeks to dismiss the

appeals.

5. We have heard the arguments of the learned

counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the

respondent No.2, the learned High Court Government

Pleader for the respondent No.1 and meticulously perused

the material available on record. We have given our

anxious consideration to the material available on record.

The point that arises for consideration in these appeals are

"Whether the impugned judgments and awards of

the Reference Court call for any interference?"

6. The pleading and evidence on record indicate

that in MFA No.6900/2017 (LAC No.157/2012), the

appellant's land measuring 1 acre 13 guntas in Sy.No.80

of Devihalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk,

Hassan District was acquired for the purpose of

Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project vide preliminary

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

notification dated 02.08.2007 and final notification dated

13.10.2008. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO)

passed an award on 07.01.2011 by fixing the market value

of the acquired land at Rs.1,46,000/-. The appellant

sought reference under Section 18(1) of the Act. The

Reference Court re-determined the market value at

Rs.32,000/- per gunta based on Ex.P2-the judgment

passed in LAC No.139/2011.

7. In MFA No.6901/2017 (LAC No.52/2013), the

appellant's land measuring 15 guntas in Sy.No.79/1 of

Devihalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk,

Hassan District was acquired for the purpose of

Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project vide preliminary

notification dated 02.08.2007 and final notification dated

16.09.2008. The SLAO passed an award on 07.01.2011

by fixing the market value of the acquired land at

Rs.18,806/-. The appellant sought reference under

Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court re-determined

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

the market value at Rs.32,000/- per gunta based on

Ex.P18-the judgment passed in LAC No.139/2011.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants has strongly

placed reliance on the judgment of the Reference Court

dated 13.06.2016 passed in LAC No.58/2016 c/w LAC

Nos.48/2016 and 49/2016. The Reference Court, in the

said cases has re-determined the market value of the

lands at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. Admittedly, the lands of

the appellants-claimants were acquired under the

preliminary notification dated 02.08.2007 for the

Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project. In LAC No.58/2016

and connected matters, the preliminary notification was

dated 21.09.2006 and the final notification was dated

27.09.2007. The acquisition was for the same purpose

and the lands acquired under the aforesaid land acquisition

cases was also of Devihalli Village. The Reference Court,

considering the other judgments has re-determined the

market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. In the cases on

hand, the acquisition is one year prior to the lands covered

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

in LAC No.58/2016 and connected matters. Hence, we

have no hesitation to apply the judgment of LAC

No.58/2016 and connected matters, to the cases on hand

and re-determine the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per

gunta.

9. Insofar as the decision of MANOJ KUMAR AND

OTHERS referred supra is concerned, it has no application

to the facts and circumstances of the case as in the said

case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken note that the

nature of land involved in the referred decision of the High

Court is different and distinct. In the cases on hand, the

acquisition is for the same purpose, of the same village

and the nature of lands involved in both the cases are

having similar potentiality. Hence, we are of the

considered view that the land loser whose lands have been

acquired for the same purpose and having same

potentiality cannot be treated dissimilarly in the award of

the compensation.

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB

10. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to

pass the following:

ORDER

i. MFA No.6900/2017 and MFA

No.6901/2017 are allowed with costs.

ii. In MFA No.6900/2017, the market value

of the land measuring 1 acre 13 guntas in

Sy.No.80 of Devihalli Village,

Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan

District is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/-

per gunta with interest and statutory

benefits. The appellant is not entitled to

the interest for the delayed period of 733

days.

iii. In MFA No.6901/2017, the market value

of the land measuring measuring 15

guntas in Sy.No.79/1 of Devihalli Village,

Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan

District is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/-

per gunta with interest and statutory