[Cites 8, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Union Of India vs The State Of Karnataka on 18 March, 2026
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
WP No. 788 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO. 788 OF 2023 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY
DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION-IV),
SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY,
CANTONMENT RAILWAY STATION,
NO.18, MILLERS ROAD,
BANGALORE- 560 046
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. CHANDRACHUD A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
Digitally signed
REPRESENTED BY
by VIJAYA P THE SPECIAL LAND
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KARNATAKA H.R.P.-II,
HASSAN- 573 201.
2. SMT. MANNAMMA
W/O LATE GUNDEGOWDA,
SINCE DEAD BY LRS,
2(A) RAMACHANDRA G.,
S/O LATE J. GUNDEGOWDA AND
LATE MANNAMMA,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
WP No. 788 of 2023
HC-KAR
AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS,
RESIDING AT
GAVENAHALLI,
HASSAN - 573201.
2(B) SMT. DAVEERAMMA,
D/O LATE J. GUNDEGOWDA AND
LATE MANNAMMA,
W/O SRI. S.R. HOPANNA,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS,
RESIDING AT DODDAPURA POST,
KASABA HOBLI,
SANKENAHALLI VILLAGE,
HASSAN TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573118.
2(C) SMT. SANNAMMA,
D/O LATE J. GUNDEGOWDA AND
LATE MANNAMMA,
W/O SRI. BASAVARAJU,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
RESIDING AT DUDDA HOBLI,
THIMMENAHALLI GRAMA,
KITTANKERE, HASSAN-573162.
2(D) SMT. LEELAMMA,
D/O LATE J. GUNDEGOWDA AND
LATE MANNAMMA,
W/O SRI. K. THIMMEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.449,
B. KATEHALLI, KOPPAL,
GAVENAHALLI POST,
KASABA HOBLI,
HASSAN-573201.
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
WP No. 788 of 2023
HC-KAR
2(E) SRI. JAGADEESHA,
S/O LATE J. GUNDEGOWDA AND
LATE MANNAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.67,
RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR,
RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR,
MYSURU-570022.
2(F) SMT. MOHANAKSHI G.,
D/O LATE J. GUNDEGOWDA AND
LATE MANNAMMA,
W/O SRI. J.R. MANJUNATHA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
RESIDING AT SRIRANGA GOWTHAM NILAYA,
3RD CROSS, 12TH MAIN ROAD,
HEMAVATHI NAGARA,
HASSAN-573201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. A.S. HARISH, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. SHESHADRI B.T., ADVOCATE FOR R2(A TO F))
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.01.2016 IN
LAC. NO.5/2011 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE PRINCIPAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT HASSAN AS PER ANNEXURE-A AND
ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S SUNIL DUTT YADAV
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
WP No. 788 of 2023
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
I.A.No.1/2023 has been filed seeking to bring the
legal representatives of deceased respondent No.2 on
record. In light of the averments made out, the application
is allowed and the legal representatives of deceased
respondent No.2 are permitted to come on record.
Petitioner is permitted to carry out the amendment.
Learned counsel Sri. Sheshadri B.T. submits that
application may be allowed and he would appear for the
legal representatives.
The matter is taken up by consent of both parties.
2. Learned counsel for the legal representatives of
respondent No.2 submits that matter may be disposed of
in terms of the order passed in W.P.No.4092/2023.
3. It is noticed that the present petition has been
filed by the beneficiary seeking to set aside the judgment
and award passed in LAC.No.5/2011, which is an award
passed as regards the reference under Section 18(1) of
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). It is
the contention of the counsel that the petitioner being
beneficiary ought to have been made parties.
4. Perused the order passed in W.P.No.4092/2023.
The observations made are as follows:
"The petitioner - Union of India represented
by Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction-IV),
South Western Railway which is the beneficiary
has challenged the correctness of the Award
passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil
Judge & J.M.F.C., at Hassan (for short "Trial
Court") in LAC No.128/2013, whereby the Trial
Court has allowed the reference under Section 18
(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and
enhanced the compensation.
2. It is the submission that the
Railways being the beneficiary is a necessary
party and the land having been acquired for the
purpose of Hassan-Bangalore Railway Project,
for which purpose Preliminary Notification under
Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
having been passed and subsequently award
has been passed under Section 11 on
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
31.12.2008 awarding compensation of
Rs.3,42,760/- per acre.
3. It is submitted that the claimant
being aggrieved by the grant of compensation
while contending that the amount awarded
requires to be enhanced, has sought for
reference to the Civil Court for enhancement of
compensation apart from raising certain other
grounds.
4. It is borne out from the records that
compensation quantified by the Land Acquisition
Officer has been accepted under protest. The
Court on receiving the reference under Section
18(1), has issued notice and after recording the
evidence and marking of documents produced by
the claimant has eventually allowed the petition
under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, enhancing the compensation in terms of
the order passed in LAC No.7/2013 which is
extracted below:
"ORDER
The reference petition filed by the claimant
is allowed in part with costs as follows:-
a. The market value of the acquired land
is determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per
Gunta.
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
b. U/Sec.23(2) of the Act the claimants
are entitled for solatium at 30% on
the enhanced amount of
compensation.
c. U/Sec.23(a)(A) of the Act the
claimants are entitled for additional
amount at 12% per annum on such
market value from the date of 4(1)
notification till the date of award.
d. U/Sec.28 of the Act the claimants are
entitled for interest at the rate of 9%
per annum for a period of one year
from the date of taking possession
and thereafter at 15% per annum on
the enhanced amount till the date of
realization of the entire amount.
e. Out of the above compensation the
amount already paid by the
respondent is liable to be deducted."
5. Learned counsel Sri.A.Chandrachud
appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that
a perusal of the cause-title of the order passed in
LAC No.128/2013 would reveal that the petitioner
herein is not arrayed as a party. He submits that
it is settled position of law as held by the
Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of U.P. AWAS EVAM VIKAS
PARISHAD V/S. GYAN DEVI (DEAD) BY
L.RS., AND ANOTHER ETC., (AIR 1995 SC
724), that the beneficiary is a necessary
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
participant in the proceedings for enhancement
and in the event beneficiary is not made a party,
it would be open for the beneficiary to have the
award set aside with appropriate directions.
6. The factual matrix as narrated above
is not in dispute. It is clear that the beneficiary
i.e., the Railways for whose benefit, land is
acquired for the purpose of Hassan-Bangalore
Railway Project is admittedly not arrayed as a
party. It is the beneficiary that eventually has to
pay enhanced compensation. The Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of U.P. AWAS EVAM VIKAS
PARISHAD (supra) in a judgment rendered by
the Constitution Bench has observed as follows:
"25. To sum up, our conclusions are:
1. .........
2. .........
3. .........
4. .........
5. .........
6. The local authority is a proper party in
the proceedings before the reference court
and is entitled to be impleaded as a party in
those proceedings wherein it can defend the
determination of the amount of compensation
by the Collector and oppose enhancement of
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
the said amount and also adduce evidence in
that regard."
7. In the light of the above position of
law, the Judgment and Award passed in LAC
No.128/2013 is set aside. The matter is remitted
for fresh adjudication before the Trial Court, as
regards the petition under Section 18(1) of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 while directing the
Trial Court to implead the petitioner herein who
is the beneficiary as an additional respondent
and take steps for conclusion of the proceedings
under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894. It is open to the parties to make joint
mention to the Court that if portion of the
proceedings can be kept intact which does not
prejudice the interest of the petitioner and the
Court to take note of the same and resume and
conclude the further proceedings. The Trial Court
to take steps for expeditious disposal of the
matter, taking note of the acquisition relates to
the year 2009.
In terms of the above, writ petition stands
allowed."
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
5. It is affirmed by both sides that facts are
identical and the petition may be disposed of in terms of
the above.
6. Noticing the observations made in
W.P.No.4092/2023, the present petition also deserves to
be disposed of on the same terms. Accordingly, the
Judgment and Award passed in LAC.No.5/2011 is set
aside. Matter is remitted for fresh adjudication before the
trial Court, as regards the petition under Section 18(1) of
the Act.
7. The trial Court is directed to implead the
petitioner herein who is the beneficiary as an additional
respondent and take steps for conclusion of the
proceedings under Section 18(1) of the Act. It is open to
the parties to make joint mention to the Court that if the
portion of the proceedings can be kept intact which does
not prejudice the interest of the petitioner as well as the
claimants, the Court may take note of the same and
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:15915
HC-KAR
resume and conclude the further proceedings as per
procedure. The trial Court to take steps for expeditious
disposal of the matter.
8. In terms of the above, the writ petition is
allowed.
Sd/-
(S SUNIL DUTT YADAV)
JUDGE
MCR
