- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI REVIEW PETITION NO. 100152 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. BASAPPA S/O SHESHAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, (DECEASED BY HIS LR’S) SMT. MALLAWWA W/O BASAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, AGE. 84 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 2. SHRI. SUBHASH S/O BASAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, AGE. 64 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 3. SHRI. VENKAPPA S/O BASAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, AGE. 62 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 4. SMT. PARAWWA W/O SHANKREPPA ANKALGI AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 5. SHRI. CHANDRAPPA S/O BASAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 6. SMT. INDRAWWA D/O BASAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, AFTER MARRIAGE MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.30 12:14:50 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 SMT. INDRAWWA W/O NAGAPPA YADALLI AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 7. SMT. LAXMAWWA @ LAXMIBAI W/O VITHAL UDAPUDI, AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 8. SHRI. YALLAPPA S/O BASAPPA INGALAGI @ YADALLI, AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 9. SHRI. SIDDAPPA S/O RAMAPPA BHANGI AGE. 39 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 10. SHRI. SADEPPA @ SADASHIV S/O RAMAPPA BHANGI, AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. SHRI. UDDAPPA S/O RAMAPPA BHANGI (DECEASED BY HIS LRS PETITIONER NO.9 & 10) …PETITIONERS (BY SRIYUTHS. P.V. SAMBARGI AND G.N. NARASAMMANAVAR, ADVS) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BAILHONGAL SUB DIVISION BAILHONGAL-591102. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, DAK BANGALOW SHAHAPUR, BELAGAVI-590006. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER NORTH ZONE, MINOR IRRIGATION VIJAYAPUR, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 TQ. DIST. VIJAYAPUR-586109. 4. SHRI. VITHAL S/O RAMAPPA BHANGI (DECEASED BY HIS LRS) SMT. SIDDAWWA W/O VITHAL BHANGI AGE. 49 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD, R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 5. SHRI. BEERAPPA S/O VITHAL BHANGI AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129. 6. SHRI. RAJU S/O VITHAL BHANGI AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. SATTIGERI VILLAGE, TQ. SAUNDATTI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591129 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1 TO R3 NOTICE TO R4 TO R6 ARE SERVED) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SEC.114 R/W ORDER XLVII RULE (1) OF CPC, PRAYING TO REJECTING THE CONTENTIONS URGED BY THE RESPONDENTS IF ANY, THIS HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT THE FOLLOWING RELIEFS A) CALL FOR THE RECORDS OF MFA NO.103029/2015 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT WHICH IS DISPOSED VIDE JUDGEMENT DATED 24.06.2016. B) ALLOW THE REVIEW PETITION AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.06.2016 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN MFA NO.103029/2015 ON THE FILE OF THIS HON’BLE COURT FILED BY THE PETITONERS/APPELLANTS. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 THIS REVIEW PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE ORDER WAS MADE THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. The petitioners filed this Review Petition to review the Judgment dated 24.06.2016, passed in MFA No.103029/2015. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this Review Petition are as follows: The petitioners are the owners of an agricultural land measuring 2 acres 8 guntas in R.S.No.170/2, and measuring 2 acres 17 guntas in R.S.No.126/1B of Sattigeri village in Saundatti Taluka. The respondents acquired an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas in R.S. no.170/2002 and 2 acre 17 guntas in R.S. No.126/1B, totally measuring 4 acres 25 guntas, for the construction of a Minor Irrigation Tank under LAQ,SR No.120/2002-2003. The petitioners filed a reference application claiming Rs.3,00,000/- per acre, but the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 Reference Court enhanced the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,80,000/- per acre along with the other statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, in LAC No.284/2005 dated 18.02.2006. The petitioners, aggrieved by the Judgment and award passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.284/2005, preferred an appeal before this Court in MFA No.103029/2015. This Court, vide judgment dated 24.06.2016, disposed of the appeal on the ground that the value of the subject matter of the appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, and the appeal is not maintainable before this Court in view of Section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act 1964. It is contended that the total extent of the land involved in the acquisition is 4 acres 25 guntas and the total value of the claim is Rs.13,87,500/- and as the claim is more than Rs.10,00,000/-; therefore, the appeal lies before this Court. Hence, this review petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned High Court Government Pleader. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the owners of land bearing R.S.No.170/2 and R.S.No.126/1B of Sattigeri village, and the respondents have acquired an extent of 2 acres 8 guntas and 2 acres 17 guntas, totally measuring 4 acres 25 guntas, for the construction of a Minor Irrigation Tank. The Reference Court redetermined the compensation at the rate of Rs.1,80,000/- per acre. The compensation redetermined by the Reference Court exceeds more than Rs.10,00,000/- and the claim of the petitioner is Rs.3,00,000/- per acre. He submits that the subject matter of the appeal is more than Rs.10,00,000/- and therefore, the appeal lies before this Court. He submits that an error is apparent on the face of the record and accordingly, prays to review the judgment dated 24.06.2016 passed in MFA No.103029/2015. 5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader supported the Judgment passed in MFA No.103029/2015, and accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 6. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 7. There is no dispute that the petitioners lands were aquired by the respondents for the construction of the Minor Irrigation Tank. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has determined the compensation. The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, filed a Reference Application seeking an enhancement of the compensation. The Reference Application was registered as LAC No.284/2005. The Reference Court, after recording the evidence, redetermined the compensation at the rate of Rs.1,80,000/- per acre along with the other statutory benefits under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. 8. The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the compensation determined by the Reference Court, preferred an appeal in MFA No.103029/2015 before this Court. This - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 Court, vide Judgment dated 24.06.2016, passed an order holding that the value of the subject matter of the appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-, and the same is not maintainable before this Court in view of the provisions of section 19(1) of the Karnataka Civil Courts Act, 1964. 9. Admittedly, the land in question, acquired by the respondents totally measuring 4 acres 25 guntas, wherein the market value determined by the Reference Court is Rs.1,80,000/- per acre, which exceeds Rs.10,00,000/-. The petitioner are claiming enhancement of compensation more than 10 lakhs. The appeal filed by the petitioners before this Court is maintainable. Thus, there is an error apparent on the face of the record. Hence, the appeal filed by the petitioners is maintainable before this Court. 10. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10826 RP No. 100152 of 2024 (i) The Review Petition is allowed. (ii) The Judgment dated 24.06.2016 passed in MFA No.103029/2015 is reviewed. (iii) The appeal in MFA No.103029/2015 is restored to its original file. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE RHR CT: BSB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1