- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100178 OF 2016 (LAC) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101161 OF 2016 IN M.F.A. NO.100178 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. KOTRAPPA S/O. KARIBASAPPA, SINCE DECEASED BY LR’S SRI SUGEERAPPA S/O. KOTRAPPA, AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KOPPAL ROAD, TQ: GANGAVATI, DIST: KOPPAL. 2. SMT. NEELAMMA W/O. HUCCHAPPA, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KOPPAL ROAD, TQ: GANGAVATI, DIST: KOPPAL. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI LAXMAN T.MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KOPPAL DIST: KOPPAL. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPT., KUSTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. KESHAVA REDDY, AAG-II ALONG WITH SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2) Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GANGAVATI IN L.A.C. NO.46/2012 DATED 18.08.2014, SUITABLY BY ENHANCING COURT THE MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND FROM RS.1,95,660/- TO RS.3,24,000/- AND ALLOW THE APPEAL WITH COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN M.F.A. NO.101161 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. THOTAMMA W/O. ANDANAPPA GADAG, SINCE DECEASED BY LR’S, SRI. CHANDRASHEKARAPPA S/O. LATE ANDANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRL. AND GOVT. EMPLOYEE, 2. SRI VEERESHAPPA S/O. LATE ANDANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRL., 3. SMT. LALITHAMMA W/O. LATE SHARANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRL., 4. MAHABALESHAPPA S/O. LATE ANDANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: AGRL., 5. NAGARAJ S/O. LATE ANDANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRL., 6. SURESH S/O. LATE ANDANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: AGRL., 7. AKKAMMA D/O. LATE ANADANAPPA GADAG, AGE: 38 YEARS, OCC: AGRL., - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 (ABOVE ALL ARE R/O: UDAMKAL, TQ: GANGAVATI, DIST: KOPPAL). …APPELLANTS (BY SRI LAXMAN T.MANTAGANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KOPPAL, DIST: KOPPAL. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION, DEPT. KUSTAGI, DIST: KOPPAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI KESHAVA REDDY, AAG-II, ALONG WITH SRI ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1 AND R2) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54 (1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT GANGAVATI IN L.A.C NO.53/2012 DATED 18.08.2014, SUITABLY BY ENHANCING COURT THE MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND FROM RS.1,95,660/- TO RS.3,24,000/- AND ALLOW THE APPEAL WITH COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) Though these appeals are listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. These appeals are filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 18.08.2014 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Gangavathi in LAC Nos.46/2012 and 53/2012, seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The claimants are the owners of agricultural land bearing sy.nos.27/B and 24 situated at Gaddi village of Gangavathi Taluk. That these lands were acquired by the Government for the purpose of construction of percolation tank for public purpose by producing preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘Act’) dated 25.9.2008. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (hereinafter referred to as the ‘S.L.A.O’), has determined the market value of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 the lands based on sale statistics basis at Rs.28,100/- per acre and awarded compensation. Being aggrieved by it, the claimants challenged the quantum of compensation and sought reference under Section 18(1) of the Act. On reference, the Reference Court has enhanced the market value and determined the market value at the rate of Rs.1,95,660/- per acre. Being aggrieved by the same, the beneficiaries/claimants are in appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants’ places reliance on the judgment of this Court in MFA No.103029/2014 decided on 09.11.2022. The aforementioned case also related to acquisition of land bearing sy.no.75 of Venkatagiri village of Gangavathi Taluk, measuring 2 acre 32 guntas, which is just 2.20 Kms away from Gaddi village. The lands acquired therein for the purpose of establishment of 110 KV Sub-station by the KPTCL. The S.L.A.O determined the market value of the lands and acquired at a sum of Rs.22,500/- per acre based - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 on sale statistics. The claimant challenged the quantum of compensation and sought reference under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to a sum of Rs.3,21,037/- per acre and the same is confirmed with the appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Gaddi village and Venkatagiri village are having distance of 2.20 Kms and the lands acquired in both the villages were having NA potentiality and they are surrounded by many factories, industries and various other commercial activities. Therefore, there cannot be discrimination between the land owners, who are standing on the same footing. Therefore, prays for enhancement of compensation. 6. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that lands acquired in the present case are 2.20 Kms away from Venkatagiri village. Therefore, the same yardstick in MFA No.103029/2014 could not be applied. Therefore, justifies the judgment and award - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 passed by the Reference Court. Hence prays for dismissal of the appeal. 7. In the present case, the lands of the claimants were acquired by way of preliminary notification dated 25.9.2008. The S.L.A.O determined compensation of Rs.28,100/- per acre. The Reference Court enhanced it to Rs.1,95,660/- per acre. Learned counsel for the appellants by placing reliance on the judgment passed in MFA No.103029/2014, stated that in Venkatagiri village of Gangavathi Taluk, for the lands acquired, a compensation of Rs.3,21,037/- per acre is awarded by the Reference Court for the purpose of establishment of 110 KV Sub- station by the KPTCL, which is 2.20 Kms from Gaddi village. Ex.P2 to Ex.P7 proved the fact that in and around the lands acquired in the present case is surrounded by several industries, factories and various other commercial activities. 8. So also the same situation to the lands acquired in Venkatagiri village. Here, there is no criteria that - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 claimants land situated at 2.20 Kms away from Venkatagiri village but what is proved here is that the Gaddi village is 2.20 Kms away from the Venkatagiri village. Therefore, here the claimants land cannot be considered as it is 2.20 Kms away from the lands acquired in Venkatagiri village. Therefore, in these circumstances having difference with the factual matrix in the judgment referred by the Additional Government Advocate in the case of GUJARAT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION V/S NAROTTAMBHAI MORARBHAI AND ANOTHER reported in (1996) 11 SCC 159 and HIRABAI AND OTHERS V/S LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER-CUM-ASSISTANAT COMMISSIONER, reported in (2010) 10 SCC 492 are not applicable in the facts and circumstances involved in the present case. 9. What is to be considered here is that when land in Venkatagiri village having N.A. Potentiality was acquired, likewise, the land situated at Gaddi village having N.A. Potentiality was acquired and the distance - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 between this is 2.20 kms, then, it cannot be said that the claimants land is situated 2.20 Kms away from Venkatagiri village having remoteness and not having non-agricultural potentiality but the aspect is to be considered is that the lands are acquired in Gaddi village are also having non- agricultural potentialities as it is proved by documentary evidence. Therefore, under these circumstances, the compensation is to be determined that the claimant’s lands were also having non-agricultural potentialities by itself as it was surrounded by many factories, mills and other buildings. Therefore, the claimants are situated on the same pedestal along with the land owners in Venkatagiri village and when the land owners in Venkatagiri village have received compensation of Rs.3,21,037/- per acre, in the same way, the claimants in this case are also entitled to compensation but with de-escalation of 10% for each year, since, in the instant case, the preliminary notification is dated 25.09.2008. Whereas, in Venkatagiri village, the lands were notified on 01.08.2010. Therefore, for each year 10% of the value is - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 de-escalated for two years, then it would be totally 20% of depreciation for Rs.3,21,037/-. 20% of Rs.3,21,037/- would be Rs.64,207/-. Therefore, if this amount is deducted from Rs.3,21,037/-, then, it would be Rs.2,56,830/-. Therefore, the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.2,56,830/- per acre along with statutory benefits and interest excluding for the delayed period, if any. 10. Hence, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. Both appeals are allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 18.08.2014, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Gangavathi, in LAC Nos.46/2012 and 53/2012, stand modified. iii. The appellants/claimants are entitled for compensation at the rate of - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2363 MFA No. 100178 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 101161 of 2016 Rs.2,56,830/- per acre along with statutory benefits, costs and interest. iv. The appellants/claimants are not entitled to interest for the delayed period, if any, in filing the appeal. v. Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP-para 1 to 7 RKM-para 8 to end List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44