- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53460-DB M.F.A. No.8507/2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8507/2022 (LAC) BETWEEN: THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER KNNL, UPPER TUNGA PROJECT SHIVAMOGGA. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASHANTH B.R. ADV.,) AND: 1. A. VEERAPPA S/O BASAVANYAPPA AGED MAJOR R/O. SRI. MANJUNATHA NILAYA 1ST STGE, 2ND CROSS VINOBANAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA. 2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIVAMOGGA …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PRATHIBHA R.K. AGA FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN LAC NO.129/2004 ON THE FILE OF HON'BLE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT SHIVAMOGGA. TO SET ASIDE THE Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court Of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53460-DB M.F.A. No.8507/2022 JUDGMENT/DECREE PASSED IN REFERENCE LAC NO.129/2004 PASSED BY HON'BLE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT SHIVAMOGGA, DATED 18.07.2014 & ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, 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) This appeal filed by the appellant - The Executive Engineer, Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (KNNL), Upper Thunga Project, Shivamogga, challenging the judgment and award dated 18.07.2014 passed in LAC No.129/2004 by the Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Shivamogga. 2. Sri.Prashanth B.R., learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently contends that the reference Court has committed a serious error in re-determining the market value of the land at ₹105/- per sq. ft. without proper appreciation of the evidence on record. The - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53460-DB M.F.A. No.8507/2022 Reference Court has mechanically relied solely on its earlier decision in LAC No.132/2004, without examining whether the lands involved therein were comparable in nature, location or potential. It is submitted that a judgment rendered in other cases, even if arising out of similar acquisitions, cannot constitute substantive evidence and cannot by itself form the basis for enhancement of compensation. It is further submitted that in the absence of cogent and independent evidence adduced by the claimant to establish the prevailing market value, the reference Court was wholly unjustified in enhancing the compensation. On these grounds, it is urged that the impugned judgment and award are unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside and accordingly, the appeal deserves to be allowed. 3. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.2 submits that the Reference Court has only proceeded based on the previous judgment - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53460-DB M.F.A. No.8507/2022 and re-determined the market value which is incorrect and seeks to allow the appeal. 4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 and perused the material available on record. The point that arises for our consideration in this appeal is: "Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court calls for any interference?" 5. The material available on record indicate that the claimant's land measuring 0.28 guntas in Sy.No.111/8 situated at Sominakoppa Village, Kasaba Hobli, Shivmogga Taluk was acquired for the purpose of construction of channel of Upper Thunga Project by issuing Preliminary Notification dated 11.09.1997 and the Land Acquisition Officer, considering the nature of the land, determined the market value at Rs.150/- per sq.mtr., and passed the award on 28.04.2003. Being aggrieved, the claimant - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53460-DB M.F.A. No.8507/2022 sought for reference under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the reference Court has re- determined the market value at Rs.105/- per sq.ft. 6. Upon a careful consideration of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of the material available on record, this Court observes that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Sri.G.C.Sharanappa v. The Special Land Acquisition Officer and Another1 referred supra considered all relevant aspects and has re-determined the market value of similarly situated lands at ₹150/- per sq.ft. It is also an admitted fact that in the said case as well as in the present case, the preliminary notification was issued on the same date, i.e., 11.09.1997, and the acquisition of lands was for the same project and the same public purpose. It is well settled that, where acquisitions arise out of the same notification and relate to similarly situated 1 MFA.No.3364/2012 and connected matters dt:13.01.2020 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:53460-DB M.F.A. No.8507/2022 lands, uniformity in the determination of compensation is required to be maintained. The appellant has not placed any material or contra evidence on record to show that the lands involved in the present case are dissimilar or that a lesser market value ought to have been fixed. In such circumstances, the market value determined by the Reference Court does not call for interference and the appeal is devoid of merit. 7. In view of the same, this appeal is required to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. In view of dismissal of the appeal, pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration. No order as to costs. Sd/- (ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31