- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 39 OF 2018 BETWEEN: SMT. THOTAGIRIYAMMA, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O CHIKKAIAH, RAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-570 019, SINCE DEAD BY HER FOLLOWING LRS., WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD. 1. SRI. M. MAHADEVU AGED 54 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, R/O.156, RAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 019. 2. SRI. DEVARAJU AGED 44 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, R/O 156, RAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 019. 3. SRI. MUDDU, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, R/O 156, RAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 019. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. M. KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PRASHANTH N V Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MYSORE SUB DIVISION, MYSORE - 570 005. AMENDED COURT ORDER DATED: 05.02.2024 2. SRI. C. NAGARAJU AGED 48 YEARS, S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, R/O 156, RAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 019. SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS A) MAHADEVA S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH B) DEVARAJU S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, C) MUDDU, S/O LATE CHIKKAIAH, ALL ARE R/O 156, RAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT - 570 019. AMENDED COURT ORDER DATED: 29.11.2021 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GOPALAKRISHNA SOODI, AGA FOR R1 V/O DT.1.10.2021, APPELLANTS ARE THE LR'S OF DECREASED R2) THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC. 54(2) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.1.2017 PASSED IN LACA NO.237/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 28.2.2009 PASSED IN LAC NO.447/1998 ON THE FILE OF THE II - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND CJM, MYSORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE APPLICATION FOR ENCHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS MSA, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE M G UMA ORAL JUDGMENT The appellants being the claimants have preferred this appeal seeking modification of the judgment and award dated 20.01.2017 passed in L.A.C.A No.237/2016 on the file of the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru (hereinafter referred to as 'the First Appellate Court') and enhance the compensation to Rs.15,59,900/- per acre. 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 land bearing Sy.No.227/1A measuring 0.37 guntas, situated at Rammanahalli village, Mysuru Taluk, Mysuru District. Preliminary Notification was issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 07.04.1995 and published on 10.08.1995 for acquiring the land for the purpose - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 of supplying the drinking water to Mysuru city, 4th Stage. The final Notification was issued on 07.10.1996 and the award came to be passed fixing the compensation at Rs.45,000/- per acre. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, claimants have sought for reference of the award. Accordingly, LAC No.447/2018 on the file of the learned II Additional Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and CJM, Mysuru came to be registered. The claimants have examined PW1, and got marked Exs.P1 to 3. The respondents have not adduced any evidence. The Reference Court after considering the materials on record enhanced the compensation to Rs.2,61,000/- per acre vide order dated 28.02.2009. Not being satisfied with the same, the claimants have preferred L.A.C.A. No.237/2016 before the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru. 2. The First Appellate Court on re-consideration of the materials on record, allowed the appeal vide order dated 20.01.2017 and enhanced the compensation to Rs.8,84,000/- per acre. Being aggrieved by the same, the claimants have preferred this Miscellaneous Second Appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 3. Heard Sri. M.Krisnappa, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri. Gopalakrishna Soodi, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1. Perused the materials on records. 4. In view of the rival contentions urged by learned Counsel for both parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is as under: "Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the First Appellate Court suffers from any perversity or illegality and needs any interference by this Court ?" My answer to the above point is in 'Affirmative' for the following: REASONS 5. It is the contention of the appellants that the Reference Court and also the First Appellate Court committed error in not relying on the compensation fixed as similarly situated lands in the same and adjacent villages, acquired either under the same Notification, or under the different Notification issued at the same time, for similar purposes. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 6. Learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance on the copy of judgment in L.A.C.A.No.187/2016 on the file of the learned 5th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru dated 25.10.2016, wherein the Court has referred to the award passed in L.A.C.A.No.110/2016 which was in respect of the land situated at Ramanahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Mysuru Taluk, and the lands were acquired for installing water purification plant stage-IV and Notification was dated 10.08.1995. In L.A.C.A.No.110/2016, the compensation was fixed at Rs.15,59,900/- per acre. Placing reliance on the said award, which is in respect of similarly situated land in L.A.C.A.No.187/2016 compensation was enhanced to Rs.15,59,900/- per acre. In L.A.C.A. No.187/2016, the 4 (1) Notification issued on 10.08.2025 is in respect of the land situated at Ramanahalli village for the purpose of installing water purification plant stage - IV. 7. In the present case, the Notification is dated 10.08.1995 and it is for the purpose of supplying the drinking water to Mysuru City and the land in question is situated in the very same Ramanahalli village, Mysuru Taluk. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 8. Learned Additional Government Advocate opposing the appeal submits that the survey numbers in both the appeals are different and therefore, the appellants are not entitled for enhancement of compensation. 9. I do not find any merits in the contentions raised by the respondents, since the Notification referred in both these cases are issued on 10.08.1995, the properties in both the cases are situated at Ramanahalli village, Mysuru Taluk and it were acquired for similar purposes i.e., in L.A.C.A No.110/2016 acquisition of land is for the purpose of installing water purification plant for Mysuru city, while, in the present case, the acquisition is for the supply of drinking water to Mysuru city. 10. Considering all these facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the reliance can be placed on the judgment in L.A.C.A No.187/2016 dated 25.10.2016 on the file of the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru. Even though the same was passed in the First Appellate Court, I do not find any reason to reject the same. It is not the contention of the learned Additional Government Advocate that the said - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:43520 MSA No. 39 of 2018 order was challenged and the compensation enhanced by the First Appellate Court has either been reversed or set aside. Under such circumstances, I find considerable force in the contentions taken by the learned counsel for the appellants. Accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The judgment and award dated 20.01.2017 passed in L.A.C.A. No.237/2016 on the file of the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mysuru is modified. (iii) The claimants are entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs.15,59,900/- per acre with all statutory benefits. SD/- (M G UMA) JUDGE BH CT:VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19