Karnataka High Court
Thippeshappa Dead By His Lrs Kalamma vs The Assistant Commissioner / Land ... on 9 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
MFA No. 6830 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6830 OF 2022 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
THIPPESHAPPA DEAD BY HIS LRS
1. KALAMMA
W/O THIPPESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS.
2. B.T. NIJAGUNA
S/O LATE THIPPESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.
3. B.T. RAJU
S/O LATE THIPPESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS.
4. B.T. THOTAPPA
S/O LATE THIPPESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS.
Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
5. B.T. HALESHAPPA
COURT OF S/O LATE THIPPESHAPPA
KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
6. B.T. RUDRESH
S/O LATE THIPPESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS.
APPELLANT NO.1 TO 6 ARE
RESIDING AT BETTAHAVERE KERE
VILLAGE, AMRUTHPURA HOBLI
TARIKERE TALUK.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI M. NARAYANA BHAT, ADV.)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
MFA No. 6830 of 2022
HC-KAR
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER/LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER
UPPRE BHADRA PROJECT
TARIKERE - 577 228.
2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
UPPRE BHADRA PROJECT
TARIKERE - 577 228.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SHWETHA KRISHNAPPA, AGA FOR R-1;
SRI NAGAIAH, ADV., FOR R-2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.16.02.2021 PASSED
IN LAC NO.2/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
PRINCIPAL JMFC, TARIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
REFERENCE PETITION U/S.18(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT,
1894.
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 RAJESH RAI K
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)
This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and
award passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and
Principal JMFC., Tarikere (referred to as "the Reference
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
Court", for brevity) in LAC No.2/2013 and seeking
enhancement.
2. The case of the appellant - landowners is that a
preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 ("the Act", for brevity) was issued
notifying several lands including the lands of the appellant-
landowners situated in Bettathavarekere village for Upper
Bhadra Project and a final declaration was also issued.
3. The respondent - Special Land Acquisition
Officer passed an award under Section 11 of the Act
awarding compensation. Being dissatisfied by the said
award, appellant-landowners sought reference before the
Reference Court under Section 18 of the Act seeking
enhancement of compensation in respect of land, trees as
well as yield of trees.
4. Thereafter, the Reference Court, having
recorded the evidence, has awarded statutory benefits
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
without enhancing the compensation as provided under
Section 23(1) of the Act.
5. Being dissatisfied with the award of
compensation by the Reference Court as aforesaid, the
appellant-landowners are before this Court in this appeal
seeking enhancement.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the
appellant-landowners and the learned counsel for the
respondents.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant-landowners
contended that though the landowners were entitled for
enhancement of compensation, the Reference Court has
only awarded the statutory benefits without providing
enhancement under Section 23(1) of the Act. It is also
contended that by inadvertence, the appellants were
unable to file the relevant documents before the Reference
Court. However, they have filed I.A.No.1/2024 seeking
production of additional documents and prays to provide
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
an opportunity to place those documents before the
Reference Court and lead evidence to prove the same.
Accordingly, he prays to set aside the award and to remit
the matters to the Reference Court for fresh consideration.
8. The said application was opposed by the
learned counsel for the respondents stating that the
Reference Court, after meticulously examining the oral and
documentary evidence placed before it, has rightly
awarded the compensation and as such, no additional
documents be permitted to be taken on record.
Accordingly, they pray to dismiss the aforesaid application
and consequently, to dismiss the appeal.
9. It could be gathered from records that the other
landowners of Bettathavarekere village, whose lands were
acquired for the similar purpose have challenged the
award before the Reference Court in different LAC
numbers. Among those cases, in LAC.Nos.2/2013,
10/2013, 14/2013, 9/2013, 15/2013, 18/2013, 12/2013,
6/2013, 17/2013, 5/2013, 19/2013 and 30/2014, the
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
Reference Court has enhanced the compensation awarded
by the SLAO by considering the documents and evidence
placed by the landowners. Those awards were challenged
by the beneficiary i.e., Visveswaraya Jala Nigam Limited in
MFA No.6332/2021 & connected matters before the
learned Single Judge of this Court, wherein the awards
passed by the Reference Court have been upheld by the
learned Single Judge by dismissing the said appeals. The
said judgment was affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
SLP (C)Nos.11779-11790/2025 vide order dated
02.05.2025. The Visveswaraya Jala Nigam Limited also
challenged the other bunch of reference cases in LAC
Nos.16/2013, 7/2013, 21/2013, 8/2013, and 31/2014
before this Court in MFA No.6338/2021 & connected
matters challenging the enhancement of compensation by
the Reference Court. However, the said appeals were
dismissed by this Court vide order dated 29.08.2025.
10. On perusal of the documents, it is seen that the
Reference Court has not enhanced the compensation other
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
than the statutory benefits under Section 23(1) of the Act.
The reasons assigned by the Reference Court for not
enhancing the compensation under the said head was that
the landowners failed to place the relevant documents to
substantiate that their land valued more than what has
been awarded by the SLAO.
11. Now that the appellant-landowners have filed
I.A.No.1/2024 under Order XLI Rule 19 read with Section
151 of CPC seeking to produce the additional documents.
12. Since this Court has already affirmed the
enhancement of award made by the Reference Court in
the aforesaid LACs and that in the LAC under this appeal,
the Reference Court has not enhanced the compensation
as aforesaid for the reason that the appellant-landowners
have failed to produce documents to substantiate the
value of their land, we are of the view that an opportunity
deserves to be extended to the appellant-landowners to
produce the additional documents and lead evidence to
that effect. Accordingly, we allow the application filed by
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
the appellant-landowners. Consequently, we pass the
following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed.
ii) The judgment and award passed in LAC
No.2/2013 by the Reference Court is set
aside and the said LAC is remanded to the
Reference Court for fresh consideration.
iii) The parties are directed to be present
before the Reference Court on
08.10.2025 without expecting any
further notice from the Reference Court.
iv) The appellants are permitted to
produce the additional documents and
lead additional evidence before the
Reference Court.
v) The respondents are also at liberty to
produce additional documents and lead
evidence.
vi) The Court fee shall be refunded to the
appellant-landowners as provided under
NC: 2025:KHC:35336-DB
HC-KAR
Section 64 of the Karnataka Court Fees
and Suits Valuation, Act.
vii) All contentions of both the parties are
kept open.
viii) The Reference Court is directed to
dispose off the matters as early as possible
and in accordance with the Karnataka (Case
Flow management in Subordinate Courts)
Rules, 2005.
Pending I.As., if any, shall stand disposed of.
The Registry is directed to return the original
records, if any, to the concerned Reference Court
forthwith, along with the certified copy of this judgment.
SD/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
PKS
