B K Gurushanthappa Vs Assistant Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

B K Gurushanthappa Vs Assistant Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed as not maintainable; liberty reserved to the appellant to prefer an appeal as per law before the appropriate forum; time spent prosecuting the appeal before this Court excluded for limitation purposes under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963; Registry directed to return all original copies to the appellant/counsel.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Miscellaneous First Appeal filed under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act against a judgment and award passed under the provisions of the Karnataka National Highway Act is maintainable before this Court.

Court's answer

An appeal filed under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act against a judgment and award passed under the provisions of the Karnataka National Highway Act is not maintainable before this Court.

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty reserved to the appellant to prefer an appeal as per law before the appropriate forum.

Key takeaways

The time spent prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Maintainability of appeal — Wrong statutory route: A Miscellaneous First Appeal filed under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act against a judgment and award dated 10.03.2025 in LAC No. 04/2019 (I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Davanagere) — which had dismissed a petition filed under Section 35 of the Karnataka National Highway Act — was held NOT MAINTAINABLE before the High Court, since the impugned judgment and award was passed under the provisions of the Karnataka National Highway Act while the appeal invoked the Land Acquisition Act. The appeal was dismissed as not maintainable, with liberty reserved to the appellant to prefer an appeal as per law before the appropriate forum; the time spent prosecuting the appeal before this Court was excluded for limitation purposes under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963; and the Registry was directed to return all original copies to the appellant/counsel.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:52724 MFA No. 9096 of 2025

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9096 OF 2025 (LAC)

BETWEEN:

B.K. GURUSHANTHAPPA

S/O B.K. BASAVALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 74 YEARS,

R/O BADA VILLAGE,

DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 001

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. KANTHARAJAPPA M.G, ADVOCATE)

AND:

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ADDITIONAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERS), PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNIT, KSHIP, K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT, KARNATAKA STATE HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, K.R.CIRCLE, BENGALURU - 560 001.

…RESPONDENTS

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 10.03.2025 PASSED IN LAC NO. 04/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DAVANAGERE, DISMISSING THE PETITION FILED U/S.35 OF KARNATAKA NATIONAL HIGH WAY ACT.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:52724 MFA No. 9096 of 2025

HC-KAR

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

The office has raised objection regarding maintainability of the appeal.

The impugned judgment and award is passed under the provisions of Karnataka National Highway Act. But, the appeal is filed under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, the appeal is not maintainable before this Court as per the provisions under the Land Acquisition Act. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable . However, liberty is reserved to the appellant to prefer appeal as per law before the appropriate forum.

The time spent for prosecuting the appeal before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation as per Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Registry is directed to return all the original copies to the appellant/counsel for the appellant.

SD/(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE

KA, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21