- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 100146 OF 2017 (LA-) BETWEEN: ANAND S/O NANASAHEB NAIK AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: ANAGAWADI, TQ: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. LINGRAJ MARADI, ADV) AND: THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, UPPER KRISHNA PROJECT, BILAGI, TALUK: BILAGI, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587116. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR RESPONDENT) THIS MSA IS U/S.54 (2) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE DATED 15.07.2017 PASSED IN LACA NO.24/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BAGALKOT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 02.12.2009 PASSED IN LAC NO.304/2005, ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR. DN), BILAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED U/SEC.18(1) OF LA ACT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.17 15:46:07 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This Miscellaneous Second Appeal is filed by the appellant, challenging the judgment and the award dated 02.12.2009 passed in LAC No.304/2005 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Bilagi, and the judgment and the award dated 15.07.2017 passed in LACA No.24/2013 by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this Miscellaneous Second Appeal, are as follows: 3. The appellant was the owner of the land bearing R.S.No.153/A measuring 10 guntas situated at Anagawadi village of Bilagi Taluk. The said land was acquired by the respondent for submersion of the Upper Krishna Project to lay a bridge and road for the displaced persons. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) was issued on 20.11.1997. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) fixed the compensation of Rs.7,360/- for 10 guntas. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 The appellant being dissatisfied with the compensation fixed by the SLAO, filed a reference petition under Section 18(1) of the Act, and the same was registered as LAC No.304/2005. It is contended that the SLAO has passed the award without giving any opportunity to the appellant to participate at any stage of the proceedings of the acquisition. The compensation awarded by the SLAO is on the lower side. It is contended that the appellant had converted the said land into non-agricultural land in 1975- 76. However, the SLAO has taken the market value based on the agricultural land. The appellant has contended that the appellant sold a plot measuring 30x40 for Rs.40,000/-, and appellant’s neighbors have also sold their plots for Rs.40,000/-. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to an enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.6,00,000/- for 10 guntas. Accordingly, prays to enhance the compensation. 4. The respondent-SLAO filed a statement of objections contending that the reference petition filed by the appellant is barred by limitation. It is also contended - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 that the SLAO has followed the provisions of the Act, and awarded the compensation. The award is not suffering from any infirmity. The compensation awarded by the SLAO is just and proper and the appellant is not entitled to any enhanced compensation. Hence, prays to dismiss the reference petition. 5. The reference court, based on the pleadings of the parties framed the relevant points for consideration. 6. The appellant, to prove his case, examined himself as P.W.1, examined one witness as P.W.2, and marked 30 documents as Exs.P1 to P30. Conversely, SLAO examined himself as R.W.1, and marked 2 documents as Exs.D1 and D2. The reference court, after assessing the verbal and the documentary evidence, answered point Nos.1 to 3 in the affirmative, and determined the market value of the said land at the rate of Rs.21,780/- for 10 guntas out of Sy.No.153/A with statutory benefits, and point No.4, as per the final order. The reference petition - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 was allowed in part vide judgment dated 02.12.2009, and the enhanced market value of the acquired 10 guntas out of Sy.No.153/A was fixed at Rs.21,780/-. the appellant is entitled to a 30% solatium on It is ordered that, the enhanced market value, and 12% additional market value on it, from the date of 4(1) final notification dated 24.11.1997 till the date of the award passed by the SLAO. It is also ordered that, the appellant is also entitled to the interest as per Section 28 of the Act at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced market value for the first year from the date of taking over possession of the acquired land i.e., 14.06.1999, if not he is entitled to the interest at the rate of 15% per annum on the same for subsequent years till the date of payment or deposit by the SLAO. 7. The appellant, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the reference court, preferred an appeal in LACA NO.24/2013 on the file of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot. The first appellant court, after re-assessing the verbal and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 the documentary evidence, allowed the appeal in part with costs vide judgment dated 15.07.2017 and enhanced the market value of the land in question from Rs.21,780/- to Rs.40,730/- for 10 guntas, and the interest was ordered to be paid from the date of 4(1) notification, i.e., 20.11.1997, and the rest of the judgment and award of the reference court was ordered to remain intact. 8. The appellant, being dissatisfied with the judgment and award passed by the courts below, filed this Miscellaneous Second Appeal. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned HCGP for the respondent- SLAO. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has produced the document at Ex.P28, which is the sale deed, wherein the appellant himself has sold the plot measuring 30x40 on 17.10.1997 at the rate of Rs.40,000/-. Neither the reference court nor the first - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 appellate court considered Ex.P28. He submits that if Ex.P28 is taken into consideration, the market value of the acquired land would be Rs.9/- per sq.ft. He also submits that the reference court, after determining the market value of the land in question at Rs.3.74/- per sq.ft based on the sale deed Ex.P28, should not have deducted 53% towards developmental charges out of Rs.3.74/- per sq.ft., to arrive at the net price of Rs.1.98/- per sq.ft rounded off to Rs.2/-. He submits that the compensation awarded by the reference court and the first appellate court is on the lower side. Hence, he prays to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation amount. 11. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondent- SLAO supports the impugned judgment and award passed by the courts below, and accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 13. There is no dispute that the appellant is the owner of the land bearing Sy.No.153/A measuring 10 guntas situated at Anagawadi village of Bilagi Taluk. The said land was acquired by the respondent by issuing a 4(1) notification on 20.11.1997. The SLAO fixed the compensation at Rs.7,360/- for 10 guntas. The appellant, being dissatisfied with the compensation determined by the SLAO, preferred a reference petition under Section 18(1) of the Act. The appellant was examined himself as P.W.1, and he reiterated the reference petition averments in his examination-in-chief. He has also produced the documents. Ex.P1 is the reference petition, which discloses that the appellant has filed a reference petition within time. Ex.P2 is the letter dated 18.01.1975 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Jamakhandi to the appellant. Ex.P3 is the extract of the PT sheet issued by the ADLR, Sub-Division, Jamakhandi regarding the acquired land. Ex. P4 is a certified copy of the house assessment extract of the property bearing No.572/1 to 572/8. Ex.P5 is the RTC - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 extract regarding the acquired land. Ex.P6 is the blueprint map of Sy No. 153/15B. Exs.P7 to P14 are the house assessment list extracts of different properties. Exs.P15 to P25 are the tax paid receipts. Ex.P26 is a copy of the requisition submitted by the appellant to the SLAO on 04.12.1995. Ex.P27 is the letter dated 19.07.1997 issued by the Commissioner, (R & A) and Secretary, Revenue Department, UKP, Bagalkot. Ex.P28 is a certified copy of the sale deed, which discloses that the appellant himself has sold the plot measuring 30x40 on 17.10.1997 for a consideration Rs.40,000/- much before the issuance of 4(1) notification. Ex.P29 is a certified copy of the judgment passed by this court in MFA Nos.262, 263 and 265 of 2002. Ex.P30 is the judgment passed in LAC Nos.236, 237, 238 of 2000, 3200 and 3204 of 1999. The appellant also examined the purchaser as P.W.2, who has purchased the plot under Ex.P28 for a consideration of Rs.40,000/-. Nothing has been elicited from the mouth of this witness regarding Ex.P28. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 14. In rebuttal, SLAO was examined himself as R.W.1. He has deposed that, he assessed the market value by following the provisions of the Act and determined the compensation, which is just and proper. 15. Admittedly, the property in question is a converted land, and there is a reference about the conversion as a non-agricultural land. The said land was acquired as non-agricultural land. Further, the appellant has produced Ex.P28, which discloses that plot measuring 30x40 was sold for a consideration of Rs.40,000/-. The reference court, instead of considering the market value as per the registered sale deed at Ex.P28, has considered Rs.7.48/- per sq.ft., and has taken the price at the rate of half of the said average sale price at Rs.3.74/- per sq.ft. The reference court, after deducting 53% towards developmental charges out of Rs.3.74/- per sq.ft. arrived at a net price of Rs.1.98/- per sq.ft., which is rounded off to Rs.2/-. The reference court committed an error in considering Rs.7.48/- per sq.ft. The reference court should - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 have taken the amount shown in Ex.P28, i.e., 9/- per sq.ft. The said aspect was also not adequately considered by the first appellate court. Considering Ex.P28, this court re- determines the market value of the land in question at Rs.9/- per sq.ft. Hence, the appellant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.98,010/- (Rs.9/- x 10 guntas). 16. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) The Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The judgment and award dated 02.12.2009 passed in LAC No.304/2005 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.), Bilagi and the judgment and award dated 15.07.2017 passed in LACA No.24/2013 by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot are modified. (iii) The market value of the land in question is enhanced from Rs.40,730/- to - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11437 MSA No. 100146 of 2017 Rs.98,010/- for 10 guntas, and the interest is ordered to be paid from the date of 4(1) notification, i.e., 20.11.1997. (iv) The rest of the judgment and award passed by the reference court shall remain intact. (v) Draw a decree accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6