- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201550 OF 2019 (LAC) C/W MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201549 OF 2019 MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201552 OF 2019 MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201554 OF 2019 IN MFA NO.201550/2019: BETWEEN: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIJAYAPUR-586101. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG A/W SRI SHIVAKUMAR TENGLI, AGA) AND: NOORUDDIN HAJ DADAMATTI R/O DHANARAGI – 586101. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by RAMESH MATHAPATI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) of LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.06.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR IN L.A.C.NO.69/2011. IN MFA NO.201549/2019: BETWEEN 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIJAYAPUR-586101. ...APPELLANTS (BY SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG A/W SRI SHIVAKUMAR TENGLI, AGA) AND: 1. ARAVIND S/O MAHADEVAPPA TELI AGE: MAJOR, 2. BASAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA TELI AGE: MAJOR, 3. RAJU S/O MAHADEVAPPA TELI AGE: MAJOR, ALL R/O DHANARGI VILLAGE – 586101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) of LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 15.06.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR IN L.A.C.NO.68/2011. IN MFA NO.201552/2019: BETWEEN 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIJAYAPUR-586101. ...APPELLANTS (BY SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG A/W SRI SHIVAKUMAR TENGLI, AGA) AND: MALLAPPA RAYAGONDAPPA TELI AGE: MAJOR, R/O DHANARAGI – 586101. RESPONDENT (BY SRI S.S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) of LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.06.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR IN L.A.C.NO.73/2011. IN MFA NO.201554/2019: BETWEEN 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, VIJAYAPUR-586101. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, VIJAYAPUR-586101. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER VIJAYAPUR-586101. ...APPELLANTS (BY SMT. ARCHANA P. TIWARI, AAG A/W SRI SHIVAKUMAR TENGLI, AGA AND: 1. BASAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA TELI 2. ARAVIND S/O MAHADEVAPPA TELI 3. RAJAPPA S/O MAHADEVAPPA TELI 4. BHARATI B. TELI 5. ASHWIN B. TELI (MINOR R/BY MOTHER GUARDIAN BHARATI) ALL ARE R/O DHANARGI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RATNA N. SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3; R4 – SERVED; R5 – MINOR REPRESENTED BY R4) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) of LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 15.06.2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR IN L.A.C.NO.81/2011. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) These appeals are filed under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter referred to as ‘LA Act’). The appeals filed are as under: i) MFA.No.201550/2019 is filed challenging the judgment and award in LAC.No.69/2011. ii) MFA.No.201549/2019 is filed challenging the judgment and award in LAC.No.68/2011. iii) MFA.No.201552/2019 is filed challenging the judgment and award in LAC.No.73/2011. iv) MFA.201554/2019 is filed challenging the judgment and award in LAC.No.81/2011. All these appeals have been filed by the Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer, Vijayapura and others challenging the Common Judgment and Award dated 15.06.2017 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge, at Vijayapura. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 2. The brief facts leading to the filing of these appeals are that the appellant-authority issued preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the LA Act on 14.02.2008 to acquire various extents of land for the construction of minor irrigation tank at Dhanargi Village. The final notification under Section 6(1) of the LA Act came to be issued on 28.03.2009 and later, the award was passed. Being aggrieved, the owners sought for reference and the reference Court under the impugned judgment re- determined the market value at Rs.5,51,250/- per acre, with statutory benefits. Being aggrieved the State- authorities are in appeal. 3. Smt. Archana P. Tiwari, learned Additional Advocate General submits that the reference Court has committed grave error in enhancing the compensation to Rs.5,51,250/- per acre without considering the evidence on record in its proper perspective. It is submitted that the respondents-claimants have failed to produce any - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER evidence to show the yield of the crop and income arising from the acquired land before the reference Court and the reference Court has erred in solely relying on Ex.P40 while enhancing the compensation. It is further submitted that the respondents-claimants are required to adduce evidence before the reference Court and establish the market value of the land which they have failed to do. Hence, she seeks to allow the appeals filed by the State by setting aside the impugned judgment and award of the reference Court. 4. Per contra, Smt. Rathna N. Shivayogimath, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-claimants supports the impugned judgment and award of the reference Court and submits that the claimants adduced evidence before the reference Court and produced as many as 49 documents but the reference Court solely considering Ex.P40 i.e., the judgment and award in LAC.No.79-80/2011, enhanced the compensation to Rs.5,51,250/- per acre. It is further submitted that the - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER reference Court has passed the common judgment in different LACs and the State has preferred appeal before the District Court in LAC.Appeal.No.44/2018 challenging the common judgment and the said appeal was came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 12.12.2019 and thereafter, the appellants have satisfied the judgment and award of the reference Court in the execution proceedings. Hence, she seeks to dismiss the appeals. 5. The reference Court framed the points for consideration and recorded the evidence. The claimants examined PW-1 and got marked Ex.P1 to P49. The respondents did not adduce any evidence, but with the consent got marked Ex.R1. The reference Court on appreciation of the evidence on record re-determined the market value at Rs.5,51,250/- per acre, with statutory interest and benefits. Being aggrieved, the State- authorities are in appeal. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER 6. We have heard the arguments of the learned Additional Advocate General, learned counsel for respondents – claimants and perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced and the material available on record. The point that arises for our consideration in these appeals is as under: “Whether re-determination of compensation by the reference Court at Rs.5,51,250/- per acre calls for any interference?” 7. The pleading and evidence on record indicate that the appellant-authority has issued a preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the LA Act on 14.02.2008. The final notification came to be issued under Section 6(1) of the LA Act on 28.03.2009. The appellant No.1 passed the award dated 24.09.2010 by determining the market value of the acquired land at Rs.51,000/- per acre. Being aggrieved the respondents – claimants sought reference under Section 18(1) of the LA - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER Act. The reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.5,51,250/- per acre, with all statutory benefits. The subject matter of the acquisition in these appeals are from Dhanargi Village, Vijayapura Taluk and District and the acquisition is for the construction of minor irrigation tank at Dhanargi Village. The subject matter of the lands in these appeals are as under: Sl.No. LAC.Nos. Survey Nos. Extend of land acquired 1. 68/2011 207/2 4 acres 5 guntas 2. 69/2011 206/2D 1 acre 18 guntas 3. 73/2011 208/1B 3 acres 20 guntas (10 guntas phot kharab) 4. 81/2011 208/5 16 acres (1 acre phot kharab) 8. The reference Court has considered the oral evidence of PW-1 and documentary evidence on record and recorded the finding that in Ex.P40 i.e., the judgment passed by the same reference Court in LAC.Nos.79 & 80/2011 dated 05.07.2013, the reference Court has enhanced the compensation at Rs.5,51,250/- in respect of land bearing Sy.No.59/1, 58/1+2 of Hunashyal Village - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER which were acquired under the notification dated 29.11.2008 for the purpose of construction of minor irrigation tank at Hunashyal Village and the distance between the land in question and Hunashyal Village is very less and the lands covered under the said notification are also irrigated lands as can be seen from Ex.R1 - the General Award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. 9. We have perused the determination of market value at Ex.P40 by the reference Court. In the said case, the nature of the land and its potentiality is similar to that of the lands acquired in the case on hand and the acquisition is also for the benefit of the same department i.e., Minor Irrigation Department for the purpose of construction of a tank. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Lakshmegowda vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Others1 and Sannegowda vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and others2 has 1 MFA.No.8703/2018 dated 25.09.2021 2 MFA.No.8760/2018 dated 24.09.2021 - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER considered the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Bal Ram and another3 and held that when the acquired lands are more or less situated nearby, when the acquired lands are identical and similar and acquired for the same purpose, it would be unfair to discriminate between the land owners to pay more compensation to some of the land owners and less compensation to the others. The reference Court considering the gap of nine months between the notification dated 29.11.2008 covered in Ex.P40 and the notification dated 14.02.2008 issued in the case on hand has applied 3.5% de-escalation and re-determined the market value at Rs.5,51,250/-. Hence, we do not find any error or perversity in the finding recorded by the reference Court calling for interference in these appeals. 10. The learned counsel for the respondents- claimants has filed a memo dated 18.03.2025 along with the judgments and orders of the trial Courts. The material 3 (2010) 5 SCC 747 - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER on record indicates that the appellants have filed LAC.Appeal.No.44/2018 challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 15.06.2017 passed in LAC.No.66/2011 by the reference Court. The said appeal was filed by the appellants before the District Court challenging the very same impugned common judgment and awards in different LACs in view of pecuniary jurisdiction. The Appellate Court in LAC.Appeal No.41/2018, LAC.Appeal.No.42/2018, LAC.Appeal No.44/2018 and LAC.Appeal.No.45/2018 vide judgment dated 12.12.2019 dismissed the appeals filed by the appellant-State. In other words, the finding recorded by the reference Court in the impugned judgments and awards, has been upheld by the Appellate Court in the aforesaid appeals by confirming the re-determination of market value by the reference Court. The order sheets in aforesaid LACs further reveal that the appellants have satisfied the judgment and award of the reference Court after dismissal for the aforesaid appeals. In view of the - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1698-DB MFA No. 201550 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 201549 of 2019 MFA No. 201552 of 2019 AND 1 OTHER same, we are of the considered view that these appeals also deserved to be dismissed. 11. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) MFA.Nos.201550/2019, 201549/2019, 201552/2019 and 201554/2019 are dismissed. (ii) No orders as to cost. Sd/- (K NATARAJAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE MCR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35 CT: PS