- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO. 200225 OF 2018 (LA) BETWEEN: a) PRABHURAO SINCE EXPIRED ON 28.11.2014 BY HIS LRS SMT. KAMALABAI W/O LATE PRABHURAO AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: H.NO.2/3, VENKAT BENNUR VILLAGE TQ: DIST: KALABURAGI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI S.S. SAJJANSHETTY AND SMT SHIVALEELA S.S., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER M & MIP, ROOM NO.7, MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, KALABURAGI - PIN NO.585 102. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FOR MIP, IWAN-E-SHAHI, KALABURAGI - PIN 585 102. Digitally signed by C HONNUR SAB Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, KALABURAGI - PIN 585 102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. MAYA T.R., H.C.G.P.,) THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54 (2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.07.2014 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AT GULBARGA IN L.A.C. APPEALNO.126/2012 VIDE ANNEXURE- A AND PLEASED TO MODIFY THE ALLOWING THE APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AT RS.2,00,640/- PER ACRE DRY LAND FROM RS.1,10,400/- PER ACRE AS AWARDED BY THE LOWER APPELLANT COURT, AND PRAYED TO AWARD MORE BY PERMITTING TO PAY DCF IN THE EVENT OF DISPOSAL, WITH ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS, INTEREST AND WITH COST, TO MEET THE REAL ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) This appeal is arising from the judgment and decree passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.532/1998 and the judgment passed by First Appellate Court in LACA No.126/2012, determining the market value of Sy.No.123C of Srinivasa Saradagi Village, District and Taluk:Gulbarga. The total extent of land is 1 acre 4 guntas and admittedly, the land is dry land. The land loser is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. 3. Section 4(1) Notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 30.06.1994 proposing to acquire the aforementioned land belonging to the appellant’s predecessor. The Special Land Acquisition Officer determined Rs.12,000/- per acre as market value. The land loser sought Reference. The Reference Court enhanced the market value to Rs.20,000/- per acre. The land loser filed first appeal before the First Appellate - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 Court. The First Appellate Court enhanced the market value to Rs.88,320/- per acre. 4. The appellants before this Court is assailing the aforementioned award and the judgment and seek higher compensation and pray for market value of Rs.1,73,780/- per acre. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that in respect of the land acquired in the same village under the Notification dated 06.09.1990, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has determined market value at Rs.1,43,863/- per acre. He would submit that the land acquired in the said case was also a dry land in the same village and project is also the same. He would submit that the land acquired in the present case is under Notification dated 30.06.1994 i.e., 4 years after acquisition of land involved in MSA No.200186/2019. 6. In the aforementioned circumstances, the learned counsel would submit that the market value had gone up in the year 1994 by huge amount and the market value of Rs.88,320/- awarded by the First Appellate Court is wholly - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 unjustified as market value for similar land acquired in the year 1990 is determined at Rs.1,43,863/-. By referring to the well-settled principles relating to escalation of value of property, the learned counsel would submit that atleast 15% escalation is to be provided each year to determine the market value of the property acquired in the year 1994 and would submit that in that event, the appellant is entitled to higher compensation than what is claimed in the present appeal and appellant is ready to pay additional Court fee. 7. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would contend that appellant is not entitled to escalation as claimed. It is his further submission that 15% escalation is uncalled for and the market value did not raise much between the years 1990 and 1994 and since the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court has awarded compensation of Rs.1,43,863/- per acre for the same land in the same village, the compensation or the market value be determined at same rate of Rs. 1,43,863/- per acre. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 8. This Court has considered the contentions raised at the bar and perused the records. Following point would arise for consideration. (a) Whether the appellant has made out a case for enhancement of compensation? 9. It is submitted at the bar that decree passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MSA No.200186/2019 determining market value at Rs.1,43,863/- per acre for dry land has attained finality and not questioned by the State or the beneficiary. It is further stated that the award is satisfied by depositing the amount. 10. There is no dispute that the property involved in the present appeal and the property involved in MSA No.200186/2019 are from the same village and both properties are dry lands. It is also noticed that the properties are acquired for the same project. 11. It is noticed that between the two Notifications, there is a time gap of 3 years and 9 months. Under these circumstances, this Court has to take into consideration, the escalation of market value. It is again well-settled principle of - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 law that if there is time gap of 4 years between two acquisitions and there are no materials available to determine the market value of the land which is acquired after first notification, the Court may determine the market value by providing reasonable escalation. Though, no hard and fast rule can be laid down as to what may be the exact percentage of escalation that can be applied, all the attending facts and circumstances have to be taken into account while providing escalation. 12. It is submitted at the bar that in quite a few cases for dry land, the Court has taken into account 8% escalation in respect of the land acquired in 1990s. This being the position, the contention that there has to be 15% escalation to determine the market value of the land acquired in the year 1994 has to be rejected and accordingly, this Court is of the view that the market value of the appellant's land which was acquired in the year 1990 has to be determined by providing 8% escalation with reference to the market value determined for acquisition which has taken place in terms of Notification dated 30.06.1994. In that event, the market value per acre would be Rs.1,86,063/-. *Page No.7 is retyped and replaced vide Court order dated 18.07.2025. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 13. Hence, the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in-part. (ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.532/1998 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi dated 16.02.2002 is modified. (iii) The judgment and decree in LACA No.126/2012 dated 14.07.2014 passed by the II Additional District Judge, Kalaburagi are modified. (iv) The market value of the appellant's land is Rs.1,86,063/- per acre. Appellant is also entitled to all statutory and consequential benefits. (v) The appellant is also entitled to the cost of the appeal. (vi) Appellant is not entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for 1475 days delayed period in filing the appeal and also 990 days for the period during which the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. *Page No.8 is retyped and replaced vide Court order dated 18.07.2025. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:2464 MSA No. 200225 of 2018 (vii) Appellant shall pay deficit Court fee within 4 weeks. Registry shall draw decree after receipt of the Court fee. (viii) Appellant is entitled to interest in the event of compensation being enhanced. Sd/- (ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE GVP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0