[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Sri Nagesh D Nayak vs The Special Land Acquisition Officer on 29 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
M.F.A. No.610/2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.610/2016 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
SRI. NAGESH D. NAYAK
S/O DEVADAS NAYAK
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
Digitally signed R/AT 1ST CROSS, GANDHINAGARA
by SHIVAMOGA CITY, SHIVAMOGA TALUK
ARSHIFA BAHAR SHIVAMOGA DISTRICT - 577201.
KHANAM
HIGH COURT OF ...APPELLANT
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. SANGAMESH G. PATIL, ADV.,)
AND:
1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
UPPER TUNGA PROJECT
SHIMOGA CITY, SHIMOGA TALUK
SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577201.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
U.T.P. SHIVAMOGA
SHIMOGA CITY
SHIMOGA TALUK
SHIMOGA DISTRICT - 577201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JAYALINGAYYA MUDENOORMATH, AGA FOR R1
SRI. B.V. PRAKASH ANGADI, ADV., FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
M.F.A. No.610/2016
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN LAC
NO.114/2004 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AT SHIVAMOGA. MODIFY THE AWARD AND JUDGMENT DATED
01.04.2011 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AT SHIVAMOGA IN LAC NO.114/2004 AND ALLOW THE CLAIM
PETITION OF THE APPELLANT BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT
APPEAL WITH COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
20.01.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the
judgment and award dated 01.04.2011 passed in LAC
No.114/2004 by the Court of the Principal Senior Civil
Judge, Shivamogga (hereinafter referred to as 'the
Reference Court') seeking for higher compensation.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranking before the Reference
Court.
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of this
appeal are that the claimant's lands measuring 1 acre 36
guntas in Sy.No.51 and 1 acre in Sy.No.52 situated at
Gadikoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, Shivamogga Taluk, were
acquired by the respondents for the purpose of the Upper
Tunga Project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer
(SLAO) determined the market value of the land at
Rs.3,50,000/- per acre. Upon reference, the Reference
Court recorded the evidence. One Devadas N.Nayak was
examined as PW-1 and Exs.P1 to P5 were marked. The
respondents neither adduced any evidence nor produced
any documents. The Reference Court, on appreciation of
the evidence on record, re-determined the market value of
the lands in Sy.Nos.51 and 52 at Rs.150/- per sq. ft. along
with all statutory benefits to the extent of 60,006 sq. feet
of land. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant has filed this
appeal seeking for higher compensation.
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
4. Sri.Sangamesh G.Patil, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the Reference Court has committed
a grave error in awarding compensation to the extent of
land measuring 60006 sq. ft. which is 50% of the total
extent of land acquired by the Authority. It is submitted
that paragraph 12 of the judgment clearly indicates that
the Reference Court has recorded the finding that there
cannot be any deduction towards the development
charges. However, after passing of the judgment, the
Reference Court reduced the extent to 50% vide order
dated 11.07.2011 which is impermissible. It is further
submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of
SMT.NINGAMMA AND ANR. Vs. THE LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER, UTP, SHIMOGA AND ANR.1
has held that there cannot be any deduction for the
development work and the acquisition is for irrigation
projects. Hence, he seeks to award the compensation of
MFA 3559/2013 dt. 08.10.2013
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
Rs.150/- per sq. ft. to the entire extent of land acquired,
by allowing the appeal.
5. Per contra, the learned Additional Government
Advocate for the respondent No.1 and Sri.B.V.Prakash
Angadi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 support
the impugned judgment of the Reference Court and submit
that the Reference Court modified the extent of land by
allowing the application filed by the respondent. It is
submitted that the Reference Court has rightly not
awarded the compensation in respect of 50% of the land
which has to be earmarked for the development. Hence,
they seek to dismiss the appeal.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the
appellant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the
respondent No.1, learned counsel for the respondent No.2
and perused the material available on record. We have
given our anxious consideration to the submissions
advanced on both the sides.
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
7. It is not in dispute that the claimant's lands
measuring 1 acre 36 guntas in Sy.No.51 and 1 acre in
Sy.No.52 situated at Gadikoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli,
Shivamogga Taluk, was acquired by the respondents for
the purpose of the Upper Tunga Project vide preliminary
notification dated 27.07.2001 and final notification dated
14.02.2002. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO)
determined the market value of the lands at Rs.3,50,000/-
per acre by passing award on 29.10.2003. The possession
of the lands in question was taken on 05.02.2001. The
claimant sought the reference. The claimant examined his
GPA holder one Devadas N.Nayak as PW-1 and Exs.P1 to
P5 were marked. The Reference Court, on appreciation of
the oral and documentary evidence has recorded a clear
finding that the property acquired was converted for non-
agricultural purpose by the orders of the Deputy
Commissioner and a layout plan was submitted for
approval to the Competent Authority. The Reference
Court, at paragraph 12 of the judgment clearly recorded
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
the finding that the compensation at the rate of Rs.150/-
per sq. ft. is the just compensation to the acquired lands
and has further recorded that the question of deduction
towards the development charges and other charges does
not arise and determined the market value of the lands
acquired at Rs.150/- per sq. ft.
8. The records further indicate that after passing
of the judgment on 01.04.2011 the District Government
Pleader filed an application under Section 152 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to rectify the arithmetical
error in paragraph 2 of the order portion of the judgment.
The said application is accompanied with memorandum of
facts signed by the said District Government Pleader. The
memorandum of facts indicates that as per paragraph 8 of
the judgment only 60,006 sq. ft. of land is permitted to be
converted from agricultural to non-agricultural purpose but
in paragraph 2 of the order portion of the judgment, it is
mentioned as 1,26,324 sq. ft. which is a typographical
error. The order dated 11.07.2011 indicates that the said
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
application is allowed. The original records placed before
this Court clearly demonstrate that an application filed by
the District Government Pleader seeking for correction of
the arithmetical error under Section 152 of the CPC was
allowed vide order dated 11.07.2011 by the Reference
Court without assigning any reasons. It is to be noticed
that the effect of the order dated 11.07.2011 would
amount to not awarding the compensation to the extent of
50% of the acquired land. Hence, the order dated
11.07.2011 of the Reference Court on an application of the
respondent cannot be termed as passing of the order
under Section 152 of the CPC. The very Reference Court
at paragraph 12 has assigned detailed reasons that the
question of deduction towards the development charges
and other charges would not arise and without touching
upon those finding, the correction of the judgment on an
application run contrary to the settled position of law.
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant's lands
measuring 1 acre 36 guntas in Sy.No.51 and 1 acre in
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
Sy.No.52 of Gadikoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, Shivamogga
Taluk, is the subject matter of acquisition. Hence, the
award of compensation to an extent of 60,006 sq. ft. is
contrary to the material available on record. The Co-
ordinate Bench in the case of SMT.NINGAMMA referred
supra, has clearly held that the claimants are entitled to
the compensation in respect of total extent of land
acquired and the entire land is utilized for the Upper Tunga
Project. The award of compensation to the smaller extent
is impermissible. We are of the considered view that the
Reference Court has committed an error in awarding
compensation to the extent of 60006 sq. ft. and to the
said extent, the impugned judgment and award of the
Reference Court is required to be set aside.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part with
costs.
The claimant is entitled to compensation at Rs.150/-
per sq. ft. with respect to lands measuring 1 acre 36
guntas in Sy.No.51 and 1 acre in Sy.No.52 of Gadikoppa
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:5023-DB
HC-KAR
Village, Kasaba Hobli, Shivamogga Taluk, with all statutory
benefits and interest as per law.
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
JUDGE
RV
List No.: 4 Sl No.: 1
