Sri. Puttaraju Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

Sri. Puttaraju Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed in part with costs; market value of 24 guntas in Sy.No.12, Kattaya Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory benefits as per law; impugned judgment and award modified to that extent; no interest payable for the 1859-day delay (1246 days in filing the appeal + 613 days in filing the application to recall the order dated 13.06.2023).

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court calls for any interference?

Court's answer

The lands involved in the co-ordinate Bench judgments and the appellant's land are similar in nature, location and potentiality, and were acquired for the same purpose under the same preliminary notification dated 11.02.2009.

Ratio / Principle

It would be unjust and inequitable to treat the appellant differently in the matter of compensation; the appellant is entitled to the same rate of compensation as awarded in the earlier cases, i.e., Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) per gunta.

Key takeaways

The market value of the land measuring 24 guntas in Sy.No.12, Kattaya Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory benefits as per law, and the impugned judgment and award is modified to that extent.ratio¶70
The appellant is not entitled to interest for the delay period of 1859 days, comprising 1246 days' delay in filing the appeal and 613 days' delay in filing the application for recalling the order dated 13.06.2023.ratio¶72

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Land Acquisition — Compensation parity — Karnataka HC (DB: Anu Sivaraman & Vijaykumar A. Patil JJ.), MFA No. 8983 of 2018 (LAC), oral judgment per Vijaykumar A. Patil J., 05.11.2025. Claimant's appeal under S.54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the award dated 09.03.2015 in LAC No.49/2014 (Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hassan), which had enhanced the value from the SLAO award of Rs.77,200/- per acre to Rs.20,000/- per gunta for 24 guntas in Sy.No.12, Kattaya Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk, acquired under notification dated 11.02.2009 (S.4(1)) for the Yagachi Reservoir Project. Relying on five co-ordinate Bench decisions in MFAs Nos. 7095/2018, 8985/2018, 8760/2018, 8703/2018 and 1475/2018 concerning lands in the very same locality acquired under the same notification, where value had been fixed at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta, the Court held the lands similar in nature, location and potentiality, that differential treatment would be unjust and inequitable, and re-determined the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory benefits. Appeal allowed in part with costs; impugned award modified accordingly; however, interest denied for the delay of 1246 days in filing the appeal and 613 days in filing the application recalling the order dated 13.06.2023 (total 1859 days).

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8983 OF 2018 (LAC)

BETWEEN:

SRI. PUTTARAJU S/O. PUTTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT BYADARAHALLI, SALAGOPPALU VILLAGE, KATTAYA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT, PIN CODE-573 101.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. NARASIMHA MURTHY G V., ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: High Court Of Karnataka

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER H.R.P. NO.2, HASSAN, PIN CODE-573 201.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY VIDHANA SOUDHA, BANGALORE-560 009.

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER YAGACHI PROJECT, BELUR, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. B R PRASHANTH., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R3; SMT. PRATHIBHA R K, AGA FOR R2)

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.03.2015, PASSED IN LAC NO.49/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, HASSAN, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FILED U/SEC.18(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDER, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ) challenging the judgment and award dated 09.03.2015 passed in LAC No.49/2014 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hassan (hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court' ) seeking for higher compensation.

Sri.Narasimha Murthy G.V., learned counsel for

the appellant submits that the Reference Court has committed a grave error in determining the market value

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

of the land in question at Rs.20,000/- per gunta. It is submitted that the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of K.S. RAMASWAMY Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS¹ has enhanced

the market value at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta. It is further submitted that in the said case, the acquisition is for the same purpose and of the same Hobli. Hence, the appellant in the instant case is also entitled for the similar benefit and seeks to allow the appeal. In support of his contention

he placed reliance on the following decisions of the Co-ordinate bench of this court:

a) SRI. SHIVANNA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS²

b) SANNEGOWDA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS³

c) LAKSHMEGOWDA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS⁴

1 MFA.NO.7095/2018 dt:12.02.2025

2 MFA.NO.8985/2018 dt:09.02.2022

3 MFA.NO.8760/2018 dt:24.09.2021

4 MFA.NO.8703/2018 dt:25.09.2021

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

d) SHIVAMMA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND OTHERS⁵

Per contra, Smt. Prathibha R.K., learned

Additional Government Advocate for Respondent No.2 and Sri.Prashanth B.R., learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3 support the impugned judgment and award of the Reference Court and submit that the Reference Court has determined the market value based on the evidence available on record, which does not call for any interference. It is further submitted that the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench cannot be the sole basis to enhance the compensation. It is also submitted that the appellant is required to adduce evidence to prove the market value of the lands in question. Hence, they seek to dismiss the appeal.

We have heard the arguments of the learned

counsel appearing for the appellant, the learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondent No.2, the learned

5 MFA.NO.1475/2018 dt:31.07.2024

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 3 and meticulously perused the material available on record. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is:

" Whether the impugned judgment and

award passed by the Reference Court calls for any interference?"

The pleadings and evidence on record indicate that the appellant’s land measuring 24 guntas in Survey No. 12, situated at Kattaya Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk, was acquired pursuant to a preliminary notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, dated 11.02.2009, for the purpose of the Yagachi Reservoir Project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) passed an award determining the market value of the land at Rs.77,200/- per acre. Being aggrieved by the

said award, the appellant sought a reference under Section 18(1) of the Act. Upon reference, the Reference Court re-determined the market value at Rs.20,000/- per

6 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

gunta. The learned counsel for the appellant, however,

relied on the judgments of

co-ordinate Benches of this Court wherein, the lands situated in the very same locality i.e., Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk, acquired under the same preliminary notification dated 11.02.2009 for the Yagachi Reservoir Project, the market value was re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta.

Having perused the said judgments, we find that the lands involved therein and the appellant’s land in the present case are similar in nature, location, and potentiality, and were acquired for the same purpose under the same notification. It would therefore be unjust and inequitable to treat the appellant differently in the matter of compensation. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the appellant is entitled to the same rate of compensation as awarded in the earlier cases referred supra, i.e., at Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) per gunta.

7 -

NC: 2025:KHC:44653-DB MFA No. 8983 of 2018

HC-KAR

For the aforementioned reasons, the appeal is

allowed in part with costs.

The market value of the land measuring 24 guntas in Sy.No.12 situated at Kattaya Village, Kattaya Hobli, Hassan Taluk is re-determined at Rs.1,00,000/- per gunta with interest and statutory benefits as per law.

The impugned judgment and award in this appeal is modified to the aforesaid extent.

The appellant is not entitled to the interest for the delay period of 1859 days i.e., 1246 days in filing the appeal as well as delay of 613 days in filing the application for recalling the order dated 13.06.2023.

Sd/(ANU SIVARAMAN) JUDGE

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

ABK,BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21