Karnataka High Court
Sri. B.G. Siddeshappa vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 18 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
M.F.A No.612/2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.612/2016 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. B.G. SIDDESHAPPA
S/O LATE PATEL GANGURAPPA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
RESIDING AT NAVULE
SHIVAMOGA CITY
SHIVAMOGA TALUK
Digitally signed SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT-577201.
by RUPA V ...APPELLANT
Location: High (BY SRI. SANGAMESH G. PATIL, ADV.,)
Court Of
Karnataka
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
TUNGA AND BHADRA PROJECT
SHIMOGA CITY, SHIMOGA TALUK
SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577201.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
K.N.N.L.U.T.P.
SHIMOGA CITY
SHIMOGA TALUK
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAMATHA SHETTY, AGA FOR R1
SRI. B.R. PRASHANTH, ADV., FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
M.F.A No.612/2016
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION
ACT, 1894 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN LAC
NO.52/2001 ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGA. MODIFY THE AWARD AND JUDGMENT
DATED 10.11.2010 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AT SHIVAMOGA IN LAC NO.52/2001 AND ALLOWS
THE CLAIM PETITION OF THE APPELLANT BY ALLOWING THE
PRESENT APPEAL WITH COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.
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 by the claimant under Section
54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Act') challenging the judgment and
award dated 10.11.2010 passed in LAC No.52/2001 by the
I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Shivamogga (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Reference Court') seeking for higher
compensation.
2. Sri.Sangamesh G Patil, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the Reference Court has committed
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
HC-KAR
a grave error in determining the market value of the land
in question at Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. It is submitted that
the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Eshwarappa and Others vs. The Special Land
Acquisition Officer and Another1 has enhanced the
market value at Rs.105/- per square feet. It is further
submitted that the acquisition of land in the said case and
the acquisition of land in the present case were for the
same purpose, of the same village and under the same
notification. Hence, the appellant in the instant case is also
entitled to the similar benefit and seeks to allow the
appeal.
3. Per contra, Smt.Mamatha Shetty, Additional
Government Advocate for respondent No.1 and
Sri.Prashanth B.R., learned counsel for the respondent
No.2 support the impugned judgment and award of the
Reference Court and submit that the Reference Court has
determined the market value based on the evidence
M.F.A. No.8200/2015 c/w M.F.A No. 5782/2015 dtd 13.01.2020
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
HC-KAR
available on record, which does not call for any
interference. It is further submitted that the judgment of
the co-ordinate Bench cannot be the sole basis to enhance
the compensation. It is also submitted that the appellant is
required to adduce evidence to prove the market value of
the land in question. Hence, they seek to dismiss the
appeal.
4. We have heard the arguments of the learned
counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned AGA for
respondent No.1, learned counsel for the respondent No.2
and meticulously perused the material available on record.
We have given our anxious consideration to the
submissions advanced. 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?"
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
HC-KAR
5. The pleadings and evidence on record indicate
that the appellant's land measuring 3 acre 16 guntas in
Sy.No.73 situated at Basavanaganguru Village, Holaluru
Hobli, Shivamogga Taluk was acquired pursuant to a
preliminary notification dated 11.09.1997 issued under
Section 4(1) of the Act for the purpose of the Upper Tunga
Project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO)
passed an award determining the market value of the land
at Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. Being aggrieved by the said
award, the appellant sought a reference under Section
18(1) of the Act. Upon reference, the Reference Court re-
determined the market value at Rs.2,00,000/- per acre.
The learned counsel for the appellant, however, relied on
judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the
case of Eshwarappa referred supra wherein, the market
value of the lands situated in the very same locality i.e.
Basavanaganguru Village, Holaluru Hobli, Shivamogga
Taluk, acquired for the same purpose and under the same
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
HC-KAR
notification was re-determined at Rs.105/- per square
feet.
6. Having perused the said judgment, we find that
the lands involved therein and the appellant's land in the
present case are similar in nature, location, and
potentiality, and were acquired for the same purpose
under the same notification. It would therefore be unjust
and inequitable to treat the appellant dissimilarly in the
matter of compensation. Accordingly, we are of the
considered view that the appellant is entitled to the same
rate of compensation as awarded in the earlier case, i.e.,
at Rs.105/- per square feet.
7. For the aforementioned reasons, the appeal is
allowed in part with costs.
The market value of the land measuring 3 acre 16
guntas in Sy.No.73 situated at Basavanaganguru Village,
Holaluru Hobli, Shivamogga Taluk, is re-determined at
NC: 2025:KHC:47414-DB
HC-KAR
Rs.105/- per square feet with interest and statutory
benefits as per law.
The impugned judgment and award in this appeal is
modified to the aforesaid effect.
However, the appellant is not entitled to interest for
the delayed period of 1807 days in filing the appeal as well
as the delayed period of 2911 and 174 days in filing the
recalling applications.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
BSR
