[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sangayya Nagayya Matapati vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 9 February, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1863
MFA No. 101408 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101408/2016 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI SANGAYYA NAGAYYA MATAPATI,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST,
R/O: SATTI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.
2. SHRI NINGAYYA NAGAYYA MATAPATI,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: SATTI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SANGAMESH S. GHULAPPANAVAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
HIPPARAGI-PROJECT, ATHANI,
DISTRICT: BELAGAVI-591 304.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
KARNATAKA NIRAVARI NIGAM NIYAMIT,
HBC DIVISION, ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 304.
Digitally signed by ... RESPONDENTS
MOHANKUMAR B
SHELAR (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1;
Location: High
Court of
SRI. LINGESH V. KATTEMANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND
ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 13.12.2013 PASSED IN L.A.C. NO.774/2011 ON THE FILE OF
THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ATHANI, AND ENHANCE
THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT FROM RS.3,00,000/- PER ACRE TO
RS.3,44,750/- PER ACRE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1863
MFA No. 101408 of 2016
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
The land losers, being aggrieved by the judgment and award
passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.774/2011 has
preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. The land belonging to the appellant was acquired for
the purpose of Hipparagi Barrage Project under the preliminary
notification dated 12.04.2007 issued under Section 4(1) of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer passed
an award determining the market value at ₹1,25,576/- per acre.
Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant sought reference
under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court enhanced the
compensation to ₹3,00,000/- per acre. Still being aggrieved, the
appellant has preferred the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in MFA
No.101409/2016, wherein, in respect of lands acquired under the
very same notification, the compensation has been determined
at ₹5,00,000/- per acre. It is submitted that the lands involved
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1863
HC-KAR
in the present appeal are similarly situated, having identical
potential and advantages. Therefore, the appellant is also
entitled to the same rate of compensation.
4. In support of his submission, learned counsel for the
appellant has produced a certified copy of the judgment passed
by the Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.101409/2016,
wherein this Court, following its earlier decision in MFA
No.101402/2016, has enhanced the compensation to
₹5,00,000/- per acre in respect of lands acquired under the
same notification. He submits that the principle of parity is
required to be applied and the appellant cannot be discriminated
against.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly
submits that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Division
Bench of this Court in MFA No.101409/2016. However, it is
submitted that the appellant is not entitled to interest for the
delayed period, as there was a delay in filing the present appeal,
which has been condoned subject to the condition that no
interest shall be paid for the delayed period.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1863
HC-KAR
6. I have carefully considered the submissions made by
the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
7. It is not in dispute that the lands involved in the
present appeal were acquired under the same preliminary
notification as in MFA No.101409/2016. It is also not in dispute
that the lands are similarly situated and possess similar
potential. The Division Bench of this Court in MFA
No.101409/2016, following its earlier judgment in MFA
No.101402/2016, has enhanced the compensation to
₹5,00,000/- per acre.
8. In view of the settled position and in order to
maintain consistency and parity, I am of the considered opinion
that the appellant is also entitled to compensation at the rate of
₹5,00,000/- per acre, along with all statutory benefits.
9. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that
there was a delay in filing the present appeal, which was
condoned subject to the condition that the appellant shall not be
entitled to interest for the delayed period. Hence, the appellant
shall not be entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation
NC: 2026:KHC-D:1863
HC-KAR
for the period of delay in preferring the appeal. Accordingly, the
following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The judgment and award passed by the Reference
Court in LAC No.774/2011 are hereby modified.
(iii) The appellant is entitled to compensation at the
rate of ₹5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) per
acre, along with all statutory benefits.
(iv) The appellant shall not be entitled to interest for
the period of delay in filing the appeal, as already
directed while condoning the delay.
Sd/-
(DR.K.MANMADHA RAO)
JUDGE
RSH, CT:BCK
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 15
