- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 114 OF 2021 BETWEEN: THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, WEST-II/CONSTRUCTION, NO.18, MILLERS ROAD, CANTONMENT, BENGALURU - 560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. B.. VENKATANARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MADHUKAR DESHPANDE, CGSC) AND: 1. SRI. GANGAIAH S/O LATE KENCHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS, R/AT MALLAGHATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 130. 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY, HASSAN - BANGALORE RAILWAY LINE, TUMKURU - 572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NARASIMHA SWAMY N.S, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 - SERVED) Digitally signed by MALATESH K C Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 THIS MSA FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 05.11.2019 PASSED IN RA.NO.171/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU. DISMISSING THE APPEAL AND CONFIRMING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 11.08.2017 PASSED IN LAC.NO. 64/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KUNIGAL , PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION MADE UNDER SECTION 18(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel Sri B S Venkatanarayana and Sri Narasimha Swamy for the parties. 2. The Deputy Chief Engineer, South Western Railway, the beneficiary has preferred the present appeal challenging the validity of the compensation amount awarded by the first appellate Court in RA No.171/2019 in respect of the lands acquired for laying the railway lane in respect of land in Sy.No.39 of Mallaghatta village, Kasaba Hobli, Kunigal taluk. The claimant being not satisfied with the determination of the compensation amount, filed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Reference Court in LAC No.64/2011. 3. Learned Judge in the Reference Court after considering the relevant aspects of the matter, enhanced the compensation value at the rate of Rs.250/- per sq. ft. and determined the compensation in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- towards the loss of house and a sum of Rs.16,000/- towards loss of trees and other statutory benefits. 4. Being aggrieved by the same, land loser filed an appeal before the District Court under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act. The Deputy Chief Engineer filed an appeal before the District Court in RA No.171/2019 under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act. 5. Learned Judge in the first appellate court after securing the records, dismissed the appeal of the present appellant and upheld the order of compensation awarded by the learned Judge in the Reference Court. Being - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 further aggrieved by the same, beneficiary has filed the present appeal on following grounds : • It is submitted that the 1st appellate court below has not assigned any cogent reasoning while determining the reference petition before it. It is submitted that the court has erred in relying on the other various LAC matters which in turn relied upon sale deed executed and inferring that the consideration mentioned in that sale deed is at lower side and therefore, the claimant is not entitled for higher compensation. • It is submitted that the 1st Appellate court should have considered that the reference court has erred in determining the market value of the acquire land (Residential Site) fixing at Rs.250/- Sq.ft. in the absence of material evidence and the evidence placed is totally inadequate. • It is submitted that the 1st Appellate court should have considered that the reference court has erred in fixing the market value at of the property at Rs.250/- per Sq.ft., knowing that in the same area the property was sold in the 2006 at Rs.120/- per Sq. ft, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 and the enhancement is not reasonable and proper. It is to be noted that the acquisition was of the year 2007 and the Reference court without any justification has enhanced the market value from R.50/- to Rs.250/- Sq. ft. The Hon'ble Apex Court has in the case of Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Division Officer) Nalgonda (A.P.) Vs. Morisetty Satyanarayana and Others (2002) 10 SCC 570 has held that it is well-settled that the sale deeds pertaining to portion of lands which are subject to acquisition would be the most relevant piece of evidence for assessing the market value of the acquired lands." 6. Sri B S Venkatanarayana, learned counsel for the appellant reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum vehemently contended that in respect of the similar lands of the same project, the Division Bench of this Court in MSA No.128/2021 dated 14.09.2023 and in MFA No.2126/2017 and connected matter by judgment dated 05.06.2023 determined the compensation amount at the rate of Rs.200/- per Sq.ft. after considering all relevant aspects of the matter and therefore sought for - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 allowing the appeal by reducing the compensation amount for the loss of land at the rate of Rs.200/- per Sq.ft. from Rs.250/- per Sq. ft. 7. Sri Narasimha Swamy N S, learned counsel for the land owner submitted that the nature of the land that was acquired from the respondent No.1 is different and therefore the Reference Court and the first appellate Court have rightly determined the compensation at the rate of Rs.250/- per sq. ft. and sought for dismissal of the appeal. 8. Having heard the arguments of both sides this Court perused the material on record meticulously. On such perusal of record meticulously, in the aforesaid MSA No.128/2021 and MFA No.2126/2017 and connected matter, the coordinate benches of this Court have not only taken into consideration the nature of land but also all the relevant aspects and the project being the same inasmuch as the lands were acquired for laying Hassan - Bengaluru Railway Lane. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30422 MSA No. 114 of 2021 9. Therefore, this Court does not find any good reason to retain the compensation amount in a sum of Rs.250/- per Sq. ft. as is determined by the reference court and confirmed by the first appellate court. 10. In fact, after taking into all relevant aspects of the matter, the amount of compensation is re-determined at the rate of Rs.200/- per Sq. ft. Therefore, the appeal to that extent needs to be allowed. Hence, the following - ORDER i) The appeal is allowed as against the sum of Rs.250/- per sq. ft. as compensation, the respondent No.1 is entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.200/- per sq. ft. with all statutory benefits. ii) Compensation amount with regard to loss of house and trees is kept in tact. Sd/- (V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE YKL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT: BHK