- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6510 MFA No. 10458 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI M MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.10458 OF 2018 (LAC) BETWEEN: JAVARAMMA W/O GOPALEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, REPRESENTD BY GPA HOLDER, LOKESH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDENT OF KATTAYA, KATTAYA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK-573201. HASSAN DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHETHAN B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER H.R.P.-II HASSAN-573201, HASSAN DISTRICT. 2 GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 3. CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD., BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6510 MFA No. 10458 of 2018 YAGACHI PROJECT DIVISION, BELUR, HASSAN DIVISION-573201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R1 AND R2 SRI. PRASHANTH B.R., ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT. THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS LISTED FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT Sri.Chethan B., counsel for the appellant, Sri.Manjunatha Rayappa., Additional Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 2, appeared in person and Sri.Prashanth B.R., counsel for respondent No.3, appeared through video conferencing. 2. The captioned appeal is filed to modify and enhance the awarded compensation in the judgment and award dated 09.10.2015, passed by the Court of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Hassan in L.A.C.No.53/2015 on several grounds as set out in the memorandum of appeal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6510 MFA No. 10458 of 2018 3. Counsel for the respective parties presented several contentions. Sri.Chethan B., counsel for the appellant in presenting his arguments, strenuously urged that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the order made by the Division Bench in MFA No.10457/2018, along with connected matters, which was disposed of on the fifth day of February, 2025. Sri.Prashanth.B.R., and AGA submits that they support for the award made by the Reference Court. Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the Cauvery Neeravari Nigam Ltd. is the beneficiary of the acquisition, and it was not arrayed as a party to the proceedings before the Reference Court, and only in this appeal it has been impleaded. Hence, he submits that the matter requires a remand to enable them to adduce evidence. It has been vehemently contended that the claimants must establish the market value by evidence, and they cannot - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6510 MFA No. 10458 of 2018 rely on the judgments / orders of this Court. Accordingly, he prayed for the dismissal of the appeal. Counsel for the appellant placed reliance on the following decisions. 1. KUPPEGOWDA V/S. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS REPORTED IN MFA NO.10457/2018 ALONG WITH CONNECTED MATTER. 2. JAVARAMMA V/S. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS REPORTED IN MFA NO.10459/2018. Counsel for respondent No.3 relied on the following decisions. CAUVERY NEERAVARI NIGAM LTD., V/S. KUPPEGOWDA AND OTHERS IN SLP (CIVIL) DIARY NO.66902/2025. 4. Heard the arguments and perused the papers and the citations with care. 5. Has the award passed by the Reference Court been just and proper? - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6510 MFA No. 10458 of 2018 6. It suffices to note that the appellant was the absolute owner of the land bearing Sy.No.314/3 measuring 03 Guntas and Sy.No.255/1 measuring 06 Guntas situated at Doranahoshalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hassan Taluk and District. The said lands and other adjoining lands were acquired under a preliminary notification dated 06.05.2010 and a final notification dated 01.08.2011. On a re-appreciation of the evidence and material on record, the Division Bench has modified the award and enhanced the compensation to Rs.1 lakh. As the Division Bench has already rejected respondent 3's request for a remand, the same is declined in the present appeal as well. Since the subject land and the land involved in the decision referred to supra are similarly situated, possess the same potential value, and were acquired for a common purpose, the principle of parity must apply. Denying the same enhanced compensation amounts to unjust discrimination, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6510 MFA No. 10458 of 2018 Adhering to the doctrine of parity, the appellant is entitled to the same benefits as allowed in [MFA NO.10457/2018 c/w MFA NO.10456/2018] because the land is contiguous, acquired for the same purpose, and the discrimination against these landowners is unsupported by law. 7. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The market value of the lands bearing Sy.No.314/3 measuring 03 Guntas and Sy.No.255/1 measuring 06 Guntas situated at Doranahoshalli Village, Kasaba Hobli, Hassan Taluk and District is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per Gunta with interest and statutory benefits. The claimant is not entitled to the interest for the delayed period of 1159 days. SD/- (JYOTI M) JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30