- 1 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101279 OF 2021(LAC) C/W MFA CROB NO.100065 OF 2022 (LAC) IN MFA NO.101279 OF 2021: BETWEEN 1 . THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DHARWAD DISTRICT-580001. 2 . THE TAHASILDAR NAVALGUND TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT-582208. 3 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, AGA) AND NAGANAGOUDA HANAMANTAGOUD PATIL AGE. MAJOR, OCC. NIL, R/O. KONDIKOPPA, TQ. NAVALAGUND, DIST. DHARWAD-582208. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.07.2016 PASSED IN LAC.NO.61/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, DHARWAD, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.10,500/- PER GUNTA & ETC., IN MFA CROB. NO.100065 OF 2022: ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 BETWEEN NAGANAGOUDA HANAMANTGOUDA PATIL AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. KONDIKOPPA, TQ. NAVALGUND, DIST. DHARWAD 582201. ...CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND 1 . THE LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DHARWAD-580001. 2 . THE TALSILDHAR NAVALGUND TALUK, DIST. DHARWAD 582208. 3 . THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V.S. KALSURMATH, AGA FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.101279/2021 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC, PRAYING THAT THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.07.2016 PASSED BY THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE DHARWAD IN LAC NO.61/2013 MAY KINDLY BE MODIFIED, BY ENHANCING THE MARKET VALUE OF THE LAND AT RS.1,00,000/- PER GUNTA AS CLAIMED BY THE CROSS OBJECTOR IN THE REFERENCE PETITION AND NOW RESTRICTED BY THE APPELLANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF COURT FEE OF RS.30,000/- PER GUNTA AND BY ALLOWING THIS CROSS OBJECTION WITH COST THROUGHOUT IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THE APPEAL AND THE CROSS OBJECTION HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 27.03.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, S.G. PANDIT, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 3 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 CAV JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) The above appeal and the cross-objection are directed against judgment & award dated 12.07.2016 passed in LAC No.61/2013 on the file of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Dharwad1. 2. The acquiring authority is in appeal under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 18942 questioning the determination of the market value of the acquired land, contending that the same is on the higher side, whereas the claimant is in cross-objection not being satisfied with the market value determined by the reference Court for the acquired land. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the SLAO issued notification dated 8.4.2010 under Section 4(1) of the Act, 1894 for acquisition of the land of the claimant bearing Sy.No.3/2, measuring 2 acres, situated at Kondikoppa village, Navalagund Taluk, Dharwad District for the purpose of grave yard. The SLAO passed an award dated 22.07.2011 determining the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,555/- per gunta. The claimant not being satisfied with the determination of said market value, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, 1 For short, ‘Reference Court’ 2 ‘For short, ‘Act, 1894’ - 4 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 1894. The Reference Court re-determined the market value of the land in question at Rs.10,500/- per gunta and held that the claimant is entitled to solatium at 30% on the enhanced compensation and also held that the claimant is entitled to interest at 9% p.a. for the first year and 15% p.a. for subsequent years from the date of 4(1) notification. 4. Heard the learned Addl. Government Advocate Sri. V.S. Kalasurmath appearing for the appellants/State and also learned counsel Sri. J.S. Shetty for the claimant/cross-objector. Perused the entire appeal papers as well as original records of the reference Court. 5. Learned AGA would submit that the market value of the acquired land determined by the reference Court at Rs.10,500/- per gunta is without any basis. He further submits that there is no material on record to arrive at Rs.10,500/- per gunta of the market value of the acquired land. It is submitted that the claimant has not placed on record the sale exemplars of the relevant years. It is submitted that the claimant has admitted that there was no sale transaction between 2009 and 2011 in that particular village i.e., Kondikoppa. He further submitted that Ex.P5-Sale Deed, on which the claimant placed reliance, is of the year 2013 and that too it relates to Annigeri - 5 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 village, which is about 4-5 kms away from the subject land. Learned AGA would further submit that the reference Court committed a grave error in placing reliance on Ex.R2 & R3, judgment and award passed in LAC No.55/2005, which related to very same village of Kondikoppa, Navalgunda Taluk, which was acquired under preliminary notification dated 25.3.1999. He would further submit that the reference Court also committed an error in adopting 10% escalation per year taking note of the market value determined at Rs.5,000/- per gunta in the above stated LAC No.55/2005. Thus, learned AGA would submit that there is no material on record to determine the market value of the acquired land at Rs.10,500/- per gunta. Therefore, he prays for setting aside the judgment and award impugned herein. 6. Per contra, learned counsel Sri. J.S. Shetty submits that the market value determined by the reference Court at Rs.10,500/- per gunta is on the lower side. He submits that the land in question is having non-agricultural potentiality, which was surrounded by layout, bus-stand and other developments, therefore, the acquired land values at Rs.1 lakh per gunta. He further submits that the reference Court failed to appreciate the material on record as well as oral evidence of - 6 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 the claimant while determining the market value of the acquired land. Learned counsel refers to Ex.P5-Sale Deed and submits that the land in the adjacent village is sold at Rs.50,000/- per gunta and the reference Court ought to have taken note of the said sale exemplar to determine the proper market value of the land in question. Learned counsel would further submit that the reference Court committed a grave error in placing reliance on Ex.R2 and R3, judgment and award passed in LAC No.55/2005, which relates to preliminary notification dated 25.3.1999. Thus, learned counsel would pray for allowing the cross-objection by determining the market value of the acquired land on the higher side appreciating the material on record. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record including original records, the only point that falls for consideration in the present appeal is, whether the market value of the acquired land determined by the reference Court is just and proper and whether it requires interference? 8. Answer to the above point would be that the market value determined by the reference Court is proper and correct and it needs no interference. - 7 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 9. Normally, the market value of the acquired land would be determined taking into consideration its non- agricultural potentiality, existing use of the land, proximity to National/State Highway or road and developed area and the developments that have taken place in and around acquired land, nature of the land, market value of other land situated in the same locality/village/area or adjacent to the acquired land and other relevant factors. While determining the market value of the acquired land, normally, sale exemplar of the same area or village of the same year would play a major role. If there is no sale exemplar, then the claimants shall have to place on record other material to establish that the acquired land has non-agricultural potentiality and developments which have taken place in and around the acquired land. 10. In the case on hand, the acquired land bearing Sy.No.3/2 measuring 2 acres is situated at Kondikoppa village, Navalagund Taluk, Dharwad District. The purpose of acquisition is for grave yard. The claimant has placed on record Ex.P4, conversion order of the Assistant Commissioner, dated 2.4.1994, relating to RS No.1/1 & ½ of the adjacent acquired land of Kondikoppa village, which would mean that the acquired land had NA potentiality. Other than said conversion - 8 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 order, the claimant has not placed on record any other material to determine the proper market value of the acquired land. 11. Much reliance is placed on Ex.P5-Sale Deed by the claimant/cross-objector, but the said Ex.P5 is of the year 2013, that too relates to another village i.e. Annigeri village, which is about 4-5 kms away from Kondikoppa village. Hence, the reference Court has rightly not placed reliance on Ex.P5. Further, PW1 in his cross-examination has admitted that there is no sale transaction of the land of Kondikoppa during the relevant period. Exs.P6 & P7-Sale Deeds also relate to Annigeri village and they are not of Kondikoppa village. Hence, no reliance could be placed on those exhibits. 12. The reference Court placed reliance on judgment and award in LAC No.55/2005, which was in respect of Block No.147/1 of very same Kondikoppa village, but the said judgment and award relates to preliminary notification dated 25.3.1999 and the market value determined therein was Rs.5,000/- per gunta. The said judgment and award has become final. When there was no other acceptable material to determine the market value of the acquired land, the reference Court has rightly placed reliance on the said judgment and award in LAC No.55/2005 and rightly applied escalation at 10% - 9 - MFA No.101279/2021 C/W MFA. CROB No.100065/2022 per year, placing reliance on decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Salaha Begum & Others Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer3. No fault could be found with the reference Court in placing reliance on the judgment and award in LAC No.55/2005, which relates to the same village of Kondikoppa. 13. In the above circumstances, we find no merit in the appeal as well as cross-objection. Accordingly, the appeal and cross-objection are dismissed as devoid of merit. Records be returned to the reference Court forthwith. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE JTR CT:VP 3 (2013) 11 SCC 426