- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 98 OF 2023 (LA) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAMAKRISHNAIAH S/O MAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, 2. SRI VENKATAPPA S/O KURALAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, SRI. SIDDAIAH SMT. BHAGYAMMA 3. SMT. MANJULA W/O VASU D/O BHAGYAMMA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, SRI LAKSHMAIAH 4. SRI KUMARA S/O LATE LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, ALL ARE R/A SIRIVARA VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TQ. AND DIST. PIN - 572 120 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MOHAN KUMAR .T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI CANAL ZONE, TUMAKURU - 572 101. Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER HEMAVATHI CANAL ZONE, TUMAKURU - 572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA SOODI, AGA FOR R1 SRI. B.R. PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.12.2018 PASSED IN RA NO. 201/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND PARTLY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.02.2017 PASSED IN LAC NO. 20/1999 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CJM, TUMAKURU, ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT. THIS MSA, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellants being the claimants in LAC.No.20/1999 on the file of learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru (hereinafter referred as to 'the Reference Court'), are impugning the judgment and award dated 20.02.2017 passed by the Reference Court and also the judgment and award dated 15.12.2018 passed in RA.No.201/2018 on the file of learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru (hereinafter referred as to 'the First Appellate Court'). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as per their rank and status before the Trial Court. 3. Facts of the case in brief are that, the claimants are the owners of 1 acre 80 guntas of land in Sy.No.62, totally measuring 4.26 acres situated at Sirivara Village, Hebbur Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk. The Special Land Acquisition Officer has not notified the same for acquisition and has awarded compensation at Rs.462/- per gunta and Rs.2,093/- per coconut tree. The same was claimed by the claimants under protest. Not being satisfied with the same, the award was referred to the Reference Court, the Reference Court held an enquiry and determined the compensation at Rs.3,500/- per gunta and Rs.4,100 per coconut tree. Not being satisfied with the same, the claimants have challenged the same before the First Appellate Court in RA.No.201/2018. The First Appellate Court on re-appreciation of the materials on record determined the compensation at Rs.3,500/- per gunta but modified the compensation of coconut trees at Rs.7,500/- per tree. Being aggrieved, the claimants have challenged the same before this Court. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 4. During the pendency of appeal, the claimants have filed IA.No.1/2025 under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereafter referred as to 'CPC') producing four additional documents i.e. the order and awards in various LAC cases, to contend that the lands which are similarly situated, adjacent to the land which were acquired, have been awarded with more compensation and the same may be applied in the present case to award compensation of Rs.6,050/- per gunta. However, by producing additional documents, the claimants are claiming Rs.50,000 per gunta and Rs.20,000/- per coconut tree. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 seriously opposing to the appeal contented that the initial claim of the claimants while preferring the appeal was Rs.6,050/- per gunta. But now the claimants are claiming Rs.50,000/- per gunta, without any basis. The additional documents produced before this Court pertains to some other villages, which are situated about 10 to 15 kilometres away from the land which is the subject matter in the present appeal. Moreover, those lands are the garden lands, having trees standing therein or situated in a - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 better position. But in the present case, the land acquired is dry land with few coconut trees. Therefore, the additional documents i.e., order and awards passed in other acquisition matters cannot be the basis to determine the compensation. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 also makes similar submission by opposing the contention taken by the appellants. 7. Learned counsel for respondents placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Monoj Kumar and others V.s State of Haryana and others1 to contend that when the judgments that are relied on by the claimants by producing additional documents under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC and when such orders are not between parties interse, an opportunity is to be given to the other side to lead evidence in rebuttal. Therefore, it is the contention of respondents that the matter is to be remanded back to the Reference Court to consider the applicability of compensation awarded in the additional documents relied on by the claimants. 1 (2018) 13 SCC 96 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 8. In the present case, the land in question is situated at Sirivara Village, Hebbur Hobli, Tumakuru Taluk. It is described as dry land. However, there is reference to few coconut trees standing in the said land for which compensation is awarded. Now it is the contention of the claimants that in the orders that are produced as additional documents, the lands that are situated at Mallappanahalli Village which is said to be an adjoining village, the compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per gunta was awarded. 9. It is pertinent to note that initially the appellants have claimed enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs.6,050/- per gunta and now they are claiming Rs.50,000/- per gunta. Under such circumstances, the claimants will have to lead the evidence about their claim and the respondents will have to be given an opportunity to rebut the contention taken by the claimants. For the said purpose, the claimants have to lead the additional evidence. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the impugned judgment passed by the Reference Court as well as the First Appellate Court is liable to be set aside and the matter is required to be remanded back to the Reference Court, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 permitting the claimants to prove applicability of the additional documents i.e., orders and awards passed in similar acquisition matters. 10. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following. ORDER i) The appeal is allowed. ii) The judgment and award dated 20.02.2017 passed in LAC.No.20/1999 on the file of learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru and the judgment and award dated 15.12.2018 passed in RA.No.201/2018 on the file of learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tumakuru, are hereby set aside. iii) The matter is remanded back to Reference Court for fresh consideration of LAC.No.20/1999, with liberty to the claimants to lead additional evidence in support of their contention. iv) It is needles to state that the respondents will be at liberty to cross-examine the witnesses, if any, and produce additional documents. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:48987 MSA No. 98 of 2023 v) In view of remand of the matter, the appellants are entitled for refund of Court fee in accordance with law. vi) IA.No.1/2025 filed by the appellants is allowed and the appellants are permitted to produce the additional documents i.e., orders and awards. vii) Office is directed to send back the Reference / First Appellate Court records, along with additional documents produced in IA.No.1/2025. viii) The claimants and the respondents are required to appear before the Reference Court on 17.12.2025 without awaiting any further notice in that regard. Sd/- (M G UMA) JUDGE PNV - CT:VS -List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26