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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Consent settlement recorded via joint memo: Respondent No.2 to pay Rs.22,000 per gunta to the appellant for the land acquired for the Hemavathy Project, payment restricted to the land only and not to trees and malkies; Office to pass modified award in terms of the joint memo.

Issue for consideration

Enhancement of compensation payable to the appellant for his land acquired for the Hemavathy Project, pursued through the Sec.18 reference (LAC No.112/1999) and the ensuing appeal (RA No.198/2018) challenged in this MSA.

Court's answer

The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the joint memo submitted by the parties.

Ratio / Principle

The judgment rendered in this appeal based on the consent joint memo shall not act as a precedent for the similarly placed claimants.

Key takeaways

Office is directed to pass a modified award in terms of the joint memo, appending the copy of the joint memo as part of the award.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka (Bengaluru), Miscellaneous Second Appeal (LA) No.103 of 2023, decided 17.09.2025 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice V Srishananda. Landowner Sri Chandrashekar filed this MSA under Sec.54(2) of the Land Acquisition Act against the judgment and award dated 29.10.2019 in RA No.198/2018 (VII Additional District Judge, Tumakuru), which dismissed his appeal against the judgment and award dated 12.02.2016 in LAC No.112/1999 (Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumakuru) that had partly allowed his Sec.18 reference petition for enhancement of compensation for land acquired for the Hemavathy Project. After unsuccessful discussions at the National Lokadalath held on 13.09.2025, the parties filed a joint memo whereby Respondent No.2 agreed to pay Rs.22,000 per gunta for the acquired land, confining payment to the land and excluding trees and malkies, and requested that the award not be treated as a precedent. The court placed the joint memo on record and disposed of the appeal in its terms, observed that the judgment based on the consent joint memo shall not act as a precedent for similarly placed claimants, and directed the Office to pass a modified award appending the joint memo as part of the award.

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:37752 MSA No. 103 of 2023

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL NO. 103 OF 2023 (LA)

BETWEEN:

SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR S/O LATE CHIIKKAMUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O SIRIVARA VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMKUR TQ AND DIST. - 572 120.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. MOHAN KUMAR T, ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HEMAVATHI CANAL ZONE TUMAKURU - 572 101.

THE CHIEF ENGINEER HEMAVATHI CANAL ZONE TUMAKURU - 572 101.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GOPALAKRISHNA SOODI, AGA FOR R1; SRI. K.S. BHEEMAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SEC.54(2) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.10.2019 PASSED IN RA NO.198/2018 ON THE FILE

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:37752 MSA No. 103 of 2023

HC-KAR

OF VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, TUMAKURU DISMISSED THE APPEAL AND FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.02.2016 PASSED IN LAC NO.112/1999 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, TUMAKURU., PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.18 OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT FOR ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

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

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Sri. Mohan Kumar T. learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. K.S. Bheemaiah and Sri. Gopala Krishna Soodi, learned Additional Government Advocate.

After addressing the arguments for a

considerable length of time, parties have filed a joint memo which reads as under:

" The Respondent No.1 on her behalf and also on behalf of the beneficiary of the land in the above Appeal herein most respectfully submits that, the Appellant herein and the Special Land Acquisition Officer and

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:37752 MSA No. 103 of 2023

HC-KAR

officials of the Respondent No.2 herein and their respective their respective Counsels had discussion and deliberations during the National Lokadalath which was held on 13.09.2025, regarding settlement of compensation to the Appellant herein, however, the same was not settled on that day. Now, today the above Appeal is listed today before this Hon'ble Court and after hearing argument, this Hon'ble Court was pleased to suggest the parties to settle the matter amicably. Accordingly, the Respondent No.2 herein has decided to pay Rs.22,000/per gunta to the Appellant land acquired for the Hemavathy Project.

Wherefore, the Respondent No.2 herein most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court mya be pleased to record this memo and pass Judgment and Award, however, this Hon'ble Court may put a rider that, this Judgment and Award going to be passed by this Hon'ble Corut shall not be a precedent for other cases in future, and further requesting this Hon'ble Court to restrict the payment only to the land and not to the Trees and malkies, in the interest of justice and equity."

Placing the joint memo on record, appeal can

be disposed of by observing that the judgment rendered in

this appeal based on the consent joint memo shall not act as a precedent for the similarly placed claimants.

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:37752 MSA No. 103 of 2023

HC-KAR

Hence, following :

ORDER

Appeal stand disposed of in terms of a joint

memo.

Office is directed to pass modified award in terms of the joint memo appending the copy of the joint memo as part of the award.

Sd/(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

SNC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31 CT: BHK