- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6900/2017 (LAC) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6901/2017 (LAC) IN M.F.A. NO.6900/2017: BETWEEN: SRI. A.B. LAKSHMEGOWDA S/O LATE BELUREGOWDA AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS R/AT. ADDIHALLI VILLAGE SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-572101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV.,) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT-II OFFICE AT D C OFFICE BUILDING HASSAN-572101. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA HOLENARASIPURA HASSAN-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1 SRI. PRASHANTH B.R. ADV., FOR R2) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 2ND JUNE 2015 IN LAC NO.157/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT HASSAN, BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION UP TO 61,72,720/- AND GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN M.F.A. NO.6901/2017: BETWEEN: SRI. A.R. KRISHNEGOWDA S/O RAMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/AT. ADDIHALLI VILLAGE SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-572101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAJARAM SOORYAMBAIL, ADV.,) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI RESERVOIR PROJECT-II OFFICE AT D C OFFICE BUILDING HASSAN-572101. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAMA HOLENARASIPURA HASSAN-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R1 SMT. SUNITA SRINIVAS, ADV., FOR R2) - - - - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 5TH MARCH 2015 IN LAC NO.52/20123 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AT HASSAN, BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE AFORESAID CASE UP TO 17,45,855/- AND GRANT SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) MFA No.6900/2017 is filed by the appellant under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the LA Act') being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 02.06.2015 passed in LAC No.157/2012 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan. MFA No.6901/2017 is filed by the appellant under Section 54(1) of the Act being aggrieved by the judgment - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 and award dated 05.03.2015 passed in LAC No.52/2013 by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hassan. 2. Heard Sri.Rajaram Sooryambail, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri.Prashanth B.R, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the issue involved in both the appeals arise out of the same preliminary notification and acquisition is the same purpose. It is submitted that the lands of the appellants were acquired for the purpose of Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project. It is further submitted that the Reference Court, without appreciating the evidence on record has determined the market value at Rs.32,000/- per gunta. It is also submitted that another Reference Court in LAC No.58/2016 c/w LAC Nos.43/2016 and 49/2016 has determined the market value of the land at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. In the said case, the preliminary notification was issued on 21.09.2006 and in the instant - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 appeals, the preliminary notification was issued on 02.08.2007 which is one year later. Hence, the appellants herein are also entitled to the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. He seeks to allow the appeals. 4. Per contra, Sri.Prashanth B.R., learned counsel for the respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court and submits that the Reference Court has determined the market value based on the evidence available on record which does not call for any interference. It is further submitted that the judgment passed in LAC No.58/2016 and connected matters of the Reference Court cannot be relied on, to determine the market value. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS1. It is also submitted that the appellants are required to adduce evidence to prove the market value of the lands in 1 (2018) 13 SCC 96 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 question. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeals. Learned High Court Government Pleader supports the judgment of the Reference Court and seeks to dismiss the appeals. 5. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent No.1 and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the material available on record. The point that arises for consideration in these appeals are "Whether the impugned judgments and awards of the Reference Court call for any interference?" 6. The pleading and evidence on record indicate that in MFA No.6900/2017 (LAC No.157/2012), the appellant's land measuring 1 acre 13 guntas in Sy.No.80 of Devihalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District was acquired for the purpose of Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project vide preliminary - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 notification dated 02.08.2007 and final notification dated 13.10.2008. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) passed an award on 07.01.2011 by fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,46,000/-. The appellant sought reference under Section 18(1) of the Act. The Reference Court re-determined the market value at Rs.32,000/- per gunta based on Ex.P2-the judgment passed in LAC No.139/2011. 7. In MFA No.6901/2017 (LAC No.52/2013), the appellant's land measuring 15 guntas in Sy.No.79/1 of Devihalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District was acquired for the purpose of Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project vide preliminary notification dated 02.08.2007 and final notification dated 16.09.2008. The SLAO passed an award on 07.01.2011 by fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.18,806/-. The appellant sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court re-determined - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 the market value at Rs.32,000/- per gunta based on Ex.P18-the judgment passed in LAC No.139/2011. 8. Learned counsel for the appellants has strongly placed reliance on the judgment of the Reference Court dated 13.06.2016 passed in LAC No.58/2016 c/w LAC Nos.48/2016 and 49/2016. The Reference Court, in the said cases has re-determined the market value of the lands at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. Admittedly, the lands of the appellants-claimants were acquired under the preliminary notification dated 02.08.2007 for the Kamasamudra Lift Irrigation project. In LAC No.58/2016 and connected matters, the preliminary notification was dated 21.09.2006 and the final notification was dated 27.09.2007. The acquisition was for the same purpose and the lands acquired under the aforesaid land acquisition cases was also of Devihalli Village. The Reference Court, considering the other judgments has re-determined the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. In the cases on hand, the acquisition is one year prior to the lands covered - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 in LAC No.58/2016 and connected matters. Hence, we have no hesitation to apply the judgment of LAC No.58/2016 and connected matters, to the cases on hand and re-determine the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. 9. Insofar as the decision of MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS referred supra is concerned, it has no application to the facts and circumstances of the case as in the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken note that the nature of land involved in the referred decision of the High Court is different and distinct. In the cases on hand, the acquisition is for the same purpose, of the same village and the nature of lands involved in both the cases are having similar potentiality. Hence, we are of the considered view that the land loser whose lands have been acquired for the same purpose and having same potentiality cannot be treated dissimilarly in the award of the compensation. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 10. For the aforementioned reasons, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. MFA No.6900/2017 and MFA No.6901/2017 are allowed with costs. ii. In MFA No.6900/2017, the market value of the land measuring 1 acre 13 guntas in Sy.No.80 of Devihalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory benefits. The appellant is not entitled to the interest for the delayed period of 733 days. iii. In MFA No.6901/2017, the market value of the land measuring measuring 15 guntas in Sy.No.79/1 of Devihalli Village, Shanthigrama Hobli, Hassan Taluk, Hassan District is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:6325-DB M.F.A. No.6900/2017 C/W M.F.A. No.6901/2017 benefits. The appellant is not entitled to the interest for the delayed period of 824 days. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0