Sri. N.Jayaprakash vs The Land Acquisition Officer
2025 Latest Caselaw 2510 Kant

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2510 Kant
Judgement Date : 17 January, 2025

Karnataka High Court

Sri. N.Jayaprakash vs The Land Acquisition Officer on 17 January, 2025

                                             -1-
                                                        NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB
                                                         MFA No.3403/2020




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                          DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025
                                          PRESENT
                          THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                                            AND
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
                    MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3403/2020 (LAC)


                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI. N. JAYAPRAKASH
                   AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
                   S/O LATE SMT. SUNITHA G
                   AND N.A. NARAYANA REDDY
                   R/AT 15/15, DODDANEKKUNDI VILLAGE
                   POST OFFICE ROAD
                   BANGALORE-560037.

                                                                ...APPELLANT

Digitally signed   (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR P.V. ADV.,)
by ARSHIFA
BAHAR KHANAM
Location: HIGH     AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                   BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
                   SANKY ROAD, BANGALORE-560020.

                                                              ...RESPONDENT
                   (BY SRI. HEGDE SHRIPAD GANGADHAR, ADV.,)


                        THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION
                   ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, ALLOW THE
                   APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE MARKET VALUE OF THE ACQUIRED
                   LAND SQUARE FEET AT THE RATE OF RS.75/- PER SQUARE
                   FEET, GRANT ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS BY MODIFYING THE
                   JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.12.2006 PASSED BY THE
                               -2-
                                     NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB
                                       MFA No.3403/2020




23RD ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE,
BANGALORE IN LAC NO.299/2002 TOGETHER WITH COSTS &
ETC.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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 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

23.12.2006 passed by the XXIII Addl. City Civil and

Sessions Judge, Bengaluru in LAC No.299/2002, by the

son of the original claimant seeking for enhancement of

the compensation.

2. Heard Sri.P.V.Chandrashekar, learned counsel

for the appellant and Sri.Hegde Sripad Gangadhar, learned

counsel for the respondent.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

the respondent-BDA has issued preliminary notification on

NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB

17.09.1992 to acquire 20 guntas of the appellant's land in

Sy.No.11 of Doddanekkundi Village, Bangalore East Taluk.

Later, final notification came to be issued on 24.11.1995.

The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value

of the land at Rs.3,30,000/- per acre. Being aggrieved,

the mother of the appellant sought reference and the

Reference Court enhanced the market value to

Rs.6,00,000/- per acre with all statutory benefits. Being

aggrieved by the quantum of compensation determined by

the Reference Court, the appellant is in appeal seeking for

higher compensation. It is submitted that the co-ordinate

Bench of this Court in MFA No.9621/2011 has re-

determined the market value at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. and the

subject matter of the said appeal is also from the same

notification. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent

supports the impugned judgment and award of the

Reference Court and submits that the market value

determined by the Reference Court is based on the

NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB

evidence before it and the same does not call for any

interference. It is submitted that insofar as the judgment

of the co-ordinate Bench referred by the learned counsel

for the appellant is concerned, the said judgment also

arises from the notifications in question. He seeks to

dismiss the appeal.

5. We have heard the arguments of the learned

counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the

respondent and meticulously perused the material

available on record. The point that arises for consideration

in this appeal is "Whether the impugned judgment

and award of the Reference Court calls for any

interference?"

6. The undisputed facts are that the appellant was

the owner in possession and enjoyment of 20 guntas of

land in Sy.No.11 of Doddanekkundi Village, K.R.Puram

Hobli, Bangalore South Taluk now Bangalore East Taluk.

The State Government and the BDA, for the purpose of

formation of the outer ring road between Varthur Road

NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB

and Sarjapur Road, issued preliminary notification under

Section 17(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act,

1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BDA Act') to acquire

various extents of land including the land of the appellant.

The final notification came to be issued on 24.11.1995.

The respondent - Land Acquisition Officer has determined

the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3,33,000/- per

acre. The mother of the appellant sought reference under

Section 18(1) of the LA Act. The Reference Court, on

appreciation of the pleading and evidence on record, re-

determined the market value at Rs.6,00,000/- per acre

with all statutory benefits. Admittedly, the original

claimant died on 14.09.2017 and the appellant being the

son of the original claimant filed this appeal seeking for

higher compensation.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant has

placed reliance on the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench

of this Court in the case of MUNIYAPPA Vs. THE

NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BDA1 and

seeks to re-determine the market value at Rs.75/- per sq.

ft. The learned counsel for the BDA also does not

seriously dispute that the judgment relied on by the

appellant in the case of MUNIYAPPA is arising out of the

same acquisition proceedings. We have meticulously

perused the reasons assigned in the judgment of the co-

ordinate Bench and noticed that the subject matter of the

land involved in the aforesaid judgment and the present

appeal are acquired under the same notification and the

nature of the land involved in both cases is also similar

and the said judgment has attained finality. Considering

the aforesaid factors and keeping in mind that similarly

placed land looser cannot be treated dissimilarly when the

subject matter of the property is similar, the acquisition is

for the same purpose and under the same notification.

The appellant is also entitled to the benefit of re-

determination of market value at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. as

MFA No.9621/2011 dt. 18.02.2014

NC: 2025:KHC:1882-DB

against Rs.6,00,000/- per acre awarded by the Reference

Court. It is needless to observe that the appellant is

entitled to all the statutory benefits in accordance with

law.

8. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to

pass the following:

ORDER

i. The appeal is allowed with costs.

ii. The market value of the subject land is re-

determined at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. with all statutory

benefits.