Karnataka Neeravari Nigama Limited vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer
2025 Latest Caselaw 10143 Kant

Karnataka High Court

Karnataka Neeravari Nigama Limited vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 12 November, 2025

                                                      -1-
                                                              NC: 2025:KHC-D:15442
                                                            MFA No. 106158 of 2024


                          HC-KAR




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                        AT DHARWAD

                        DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025

                                             BEFORE

                       THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

                  MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.106158 OF 2024 (LAC)

                         BETWEEN:


                         KARNATAKA NIRAVARI NIGAMA LIMITED,
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
                         GRBCC DIV.NO.2,
                         HIDAKAL DAM,
                         TAL: HUKKERI,
                         DIST: BELAGAVI.

GIRIJA A.                                                               ...APPELLANT
BYAHATTI
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
                         (BY SRI. ABHILASH, ADVOCATE FOR
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD
                              SRI. SHREEVATSA HEGDE, ADVOCATE)


                         AND:

                         1.   THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
                              HIDKAL DAM, HUKKERI .


                         2.   THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
                              REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
                              GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA,
                              -2-
                                         NC: 2025:KHC-D:15442
                                     MFA No. 106158 of 2024


HC-KAR




     M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
     R/BY D.C. BELAGAVI.


3.   BHIMARAY DURGAPPA PATIL,
     SINCE DECEASED R/BY HIS LRS
     KEMPANNA BHIMARAY PATIL,
     AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
     R/O. HAGEDAL VILLAGE, TQ: HUKKERI,
     DIST: BELAGAVI.

                                               ...RESPONDENTS

       THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 74 (1) OF RIGHT TO
FAIR     COMPENSATION      AND     TRANSPARENCY     IN   LAND
ACQUISITION,    REHABILITATION     AND    RESETTLEMENT    ACT,
2013, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN THE JUDGMENT
DATED 06.08.2024 AND AWARD DATED 14.08.2024 BY IV
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BELAGAVI AND THE LAND
ACQUISITION,      REHABILITATION         AND    RESETTLEMENT
AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI IN L.A.C.       NO.825/2022; ALLOW THE
APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.08.2024 AND
AWARD DATED 14.08.2024 BY THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE AND THE LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND
RESETTLEMENT AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI IN L.A.C. NO.825/2022.


       THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER
WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM:    THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
                               -3-
                                            NC: 2025:KHC-D:15442
                                      MFA No. 106158 of 2024


HC-KAR




                         ORAL ORDER

(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)

Sri Abhilash representing Sri Shreevatsa Hedge

learned counsel on record for the appellant is present.

2. The matter was listed on 03.11.2025 on the

ground that the appellant did not comply the office

objections. However, on the said day learned counsel by

name Abhishek represented that the office objections are

complied. Basing on his submission, following order was

passed:

"Sri Abhishek, representing Sri Shreevatsa Hegde, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the office objections are complied.

Office to verify. In case office objections are not complied, registry to list the appeal under the same caption on 12.11.2025."

NC: 2025:KHC-D:15442

HC-KAR

However, by the office note placed on this day it is

clear that the office objections are not yet complied.

Therefore this Court finds no grounds to grant further time.

Hence appeal stands dismissed for non compliance of

office objections.

Sd/-

(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

EM CT-MCK