- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH 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.6605/2021 (LAC) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6073/2021 (LAC) IN M.F.A. No.6605/2021: BETWEEN: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KNNL, UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIVAMOGGA-577201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASHANTH B.R. ADV., FOR SRI. B. SUDHAKAR, ADV.,) AND: SAYYAD FAROOQ SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. 1. SMT. NOORANNISA W/O SAYYAD FAROOQ AGED 50 YEARS. 2. SAYYAD NAVEED S/O SAYYAD FAROOQ AGED 30 YEARS. 3. SMT. MASUDA PARVEEN W/O SAYYAD HANIF AGED 27 YEARS. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 4. SMT. MOUSINA PARVEEN W/O SAYYAD MISAJ AGED 24 YEARS 5. SAYYAD SUHAIL S/O SAYYAD FAROOQ AGED 24 YEARS. 1 TO 5 ARE R/AT. MUTTINAKOPPA N R PURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577134. 6. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIVAMOGGA-577201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.B. LOKANATH, ADV., FOR R1 TO R5 SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R6) - - - THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN LAC NO.5/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT N.R. PURA. SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT /DECREE PASSED IN REFERENCE LAC NO.5/2017 PASSED BY HON'BLE THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT N.R. PURA DATED 12.09.2018 & ETC. IN M.F.A. NO.6073/2021: BETWEEN: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KNNL, UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIVAMOGGA-577201. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASHANTH B.R. ADV., FOR SRI. B. SUDHAKAR, ADV.,) AND: 1. H.M. SHANMUKA GOWDA S/O MANJAPPA GOWDA - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT. MUTHINAKOPPA VILLAGE N R PURA TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577134. 2. THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIVAMOGGA-577201. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.B. LOKANATH, ADV., FOR R1 SRI. G.S. ARUNA, HCGP FOR R2) - - - THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN LAC NO.7/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT N.R. PURA. SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT /DECREE PASSED IN REFERENCE LAC NO.7/2017 PASSED BY HON'BLE THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT N.R. PURA DATED 17.09.2018 & ETC. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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.6605/2021 and MFA No.6073/2021 are filed by the appellant - The Executive Engineer, KNNL, Upper Thunga Project, Shivamogga, challenging the judgments and awards dated 12.09.2018 and 17.09.2018 passed in LAC.No.5/2017 and in LAC.No.7/2017, respectively passed - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, at N.R.Pura (hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court'). 2. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the Reference Court. 3. The brief facts leading to filing of these appeals are that the land of the claimant in LAC No.5/2017 measuring 1.07 acres situated at Sy.No.190 of Muttinakoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, N.R.Pura Taluk and the land of the claimant in LAC No.7/2017 measuring 1 acre situated at Sy.No.173/3 of Muttinakoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, N.R.Pura Taluk were acquired for the purpose of Upper Thunga project vide preliminary notification dated 05.11.2003. The claimants in both the cases sought reference under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 4. The claimant in LAC No.5/2017 examined himself as PW-1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P17. The - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 respondents did not adduce any evidence. In LAC No.7/2017, claimant examined himself as PW-1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P13. The respondents did not adduce any evidence. The Reference Court re-determined the market value of the lands in question at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre with all statutory benefits and interest. Challenging the quantum of compensation, the beneficiary of acquisition is in appeal. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents in respect of both the appeals. 6. Sri.Prashanth B.R., learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Reference Court, without appreciating the evidence on record has re-determined the market value of the lands in question at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre placing reliance solely on the judgment in MFA No.1556/2010 (LAC). It is submitted that the claimants failed to produce any evidence before the Reference Court with regard to the actual market value. It is further - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 submitted that the burden is on the claimants to prove the market value of the acquired lands by legally acceptable evidence. In the instant case, the claimants have not produced any evidence with regard to the market value of the lands. However, the Reference Court has placed reliance on the judgment in MFA No.1556/2010 and enhanced the compensation to Rs.10,80,000/- which is impermissible. He further submits that the Reference Court cannot place reliance on the judgments of the Court and enhance the compensation. In support of his contentions, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS1. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeals. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants submits that the acquisition of the subject lands is for the purpose of construction of channel of the Upper Thunga Project and the Reference Court has 1 (2018) 13 SCC 96 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 determined the market value based on the evidence available on record which does not call for any interference. It is further submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MFA No.1556/2010 (LAC) has considered all the aspects and affirmed the market value at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre. It is further submitted that in MFA No.7214/2015, this Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant confirming the market value of Rs.10,80,000/- per acre and in the said case, the acquisition was of the year 2007. Accordingly, he seeks to dismiss the appeals. 8. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondents in respect of both the appeals and perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the evidence available on record. The point that arises for consideration in these appeals is Whether the impugned judgments and - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 awards of the Reference Court call for any interference? 9. The material available on record would indicate that in LAC No.5/2017 (MFA No.6605/2021) land measuring 1.07 acres in Sy.No.190 of Muttinakoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, N.R. Pura Taluk and in LAC No.7/2017 (MFA No.6073/2021) land measuring 1 acre in Sy.No.173/3 of Muttinakoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, N.R. Pura Taluk were acquired for the benefit of the appellant for construction of channel of Upper Thunga Project by issuing preliminary notification dated 05.11.2003 and the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO), considering the nature of the lands, determined the market value at Rs.37,300/- per acre and the award was passed by the SLAO on 15.06.2007. Being aggrieved, the claimants sought for reference under Section 18(1) of Act and the Reference Court, considering the judgment of this Court in MFA No.1556/2010 re-determined the market value at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 10. The claimants, in order to prove their case have deposed before the Reference Court that the acquired lands are irrigated lands and have high potential to grow commercial crops. The yield certificate produced by the claimants demonstrates that the claimants harvested coconuts for the purpose of commercial use and also used to grow areca nut. The Reference Court, considering the oral and documentary evidence has recorded detailed reasons with regard to the nature of lands and their potentiality. The Reference Court has considered the judgment in MFA No.1556/2010 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court and re-determined the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.10,80,000/- per acre. We have meticulously perused the reasoning of the judgment in the case of SRI. BASAPPA Vs. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ANOTHER2. In the said case, the acquisition of land was for the purpose of Upper Thunga project and the preliminary notification under 2 MFA No.1556/2010 dated 7.7.11 - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 25.01.2000. In the case on hand, the acquisition is for the Upper Thunga project and the preliminary notification is dated 05.11.2003. Admittedly, the preliminary notification in the case on hand is 3 years after the preliminary notification issued in the case of BASAPPA referred supra. The Reference Court has admittedly not given any escalation for the period of 3 years and it has considered the market value of the lands as determined in the case of BASAPPA referred to supra. We have also noticed that the nature of land covered in both the cases are irrigated lands and the crops grown are commercial crops. Hence, the contention of the appellant that the Reference Court has erred in placing reliance on the case of BASAPPA referred supra, has no merit and is accordingly rejected. 11. We have also taken note of the judgment of this Court in the case of THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, UPPER THUNGA PROJECT Vs. DR.D.N.SHIVAPPA3. This Court, 3 MFA No.7214/2015 dated 5.2.20 - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 taking note of the fact that the acquisition is for the purpose of Upper Thunga project and considering the judgment passed in the case of BASAPPA referred supra, has affirmed the determination of market value at Rs.10,80,000/-. The appellant challenged the said judgment before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the appeal came to be dismissed vide order dated 13.07.2022. We also cannot lose sight of the fact that the co-ordinate Bench in the case of G. HANUMANTHA RAO Vs. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUSITION OFFICER, UPPER THUNGA PROJECT AND ANOTHER4 has considered the various aspects and affirmed the re-determination of compensation at Rs.105/- per sq. ft. In the abovementioned judgment, the preliminary notification was issued on 25.01.2001, 17.03.2001 and 20.05.2004, however in the cases on hand, the preliminary notification was issued on 05.11.2003 and the acquisition of lands was for the same project and same purpose. The said judgment was taken up in the appeal before the Hon'ble 4 MFA No.7998/2014 and connected appeals dated 13.1.2020 - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 Supreme Court in the case of THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNL Vs. NAGAMMA AND ANOTHER5, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dismissed the appeal filed by the beneficiaries, confirming re- determination of the market value at Rs.105/- per sq. ft. In view of the aforesaid judgment, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgments and awards of the Reference Court which has re-determined the market value lesser than the aforesaid judgment. 12. 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 case on hand, the acquisition is for the same purpose and the nature of lands involved is similar having similar potentiality to grow commercial crops. Hence, the Reference Court has placed 5 Civil Appeal No.7587/2021 and connected cases dated 25.4.24 - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:8604-DB M.F.A. No.6605/2021 C/W M.F.A. No.6073/2021 reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of BASAPPA, referred supra. We do not find any error in the impugned judgments and awards calling for interference in these appeals. 13. For the aforementioned reasons, we pass the following: ORDER The appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. 14. Pending interlocutory application in MFA No.6605/2021 stands disposed of. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7