Karnataka High Court
Prakash S/O Byroji Rao, Dead By His Legal ... vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 30 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:43354
WP No. 26755 of 2025
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO.26755 OF 2025 (LA-RES)
BETWEEN:
PRAKASH S/O BYROJI RAO,
DEAD BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS
1. P. MANJULA
D/O LATE PRAKASH RAO,
AGED 45 YEARS,
2. ABHILASH
S/O LATE PRAKASH,
AGED 36 YEARS,
3. ASHISHA
D/O LATE PRAKASH RAO,
AGED 32 YEARS,
4. ANUSHA
Digitally signed by D/O LATE PRAKASH RAO,
MAHALAKSHMI B M AGED 30 YEARS,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 5. MAHENDRA
KARNATAKA
S/O BYROJI RAO,
AGED 71 YEARS,
6. NAGARAJA
S/O BYROJI RAO,
AGED 62 YEARS
(THROUGH HIS GPA HOLDER,
MAHENDRA S/O BYROJI RAO)
7. SUBHASHA
S/O BYROJI RAO,
AGED 40 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:43354
WP No. 26755 of 2025
HC-KAR
DASARATH S/O BYROJI RAO
DEAD BY HIS LR's.
8. ANITHA BAI
W/O DASARATH
AGED 36 YEARS
9. RAJU S/O BYROJI RAO,
AGED 34 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/O. BASAVANAGANGURU VILLAGE,
HOLALURU HOBLI,
SHIMOGA TQ. & DIST.-577201.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI RAJU BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
UPPER THUNGA PROJECT,
SHIMOGA-577201.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
UPPER THUNGA PROJECT,
SHIMOGA-577201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARISHA A.S., AGA)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS
TO MAKE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION AMOUNT AS PER THE ORDER
OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DATED 17/04/2025
PASSED IN CA 5309/2025 WITHOUT DEDUCTING ANY AMOUNT
TOWARDS TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE (TDS). A CERTIFIED COPY
OF THE ORDER DATED 17/04/2025 IS HEREBY PRODUCED AS
ANNEXURE-A.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:43354
WP No. 26755 of 2025
HC-KAR
ORAL ORDER
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay compensation in terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in C.A.No.5309/2025 dated 17.02.2025, without deducting any amount towards Tax Deduction at Source ('TDS' for short).
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents. Brief facts:
3. The petitioners are the absolute owners of the land bearing Sy.No.47, measuring 6 acres, 4 guntas of tank fed land and 1 acre of dry land situated at Basavana Ganguru Village, Holalluru Hobli, Shivamoga Taluk and District. The said land was acquired by the respondents for alignment of upper Thunga canal in the year 1997, notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('Act, 1894' for short) on 11.09.1997, followed by -4- NC: 2025:KHC:43354 WP No. 26755 of 2025 HC-KAR the final notification. The possession of the land was taken on 19.12.2000. The Land Acquisition Officer ('LAO' for short) passed an award on 23.07.2001 by fixing compensation to the claimants at the rate of `1,00,000/- for the tank fed land and `47,000/- for the dry land. Not being satisfied, the petitioners sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, 1894, which was numbered as L.A.C.No.58/2001.
4. The Civil Court enhanced compensation to `2,00,000/- per acre for tank fed land and `1,00,000/- per acre for dry land. The petitioners preferred M.F.A.No.8540/2015 before Division Bench of this Court seeking further enhancement to `105/- per square feet. The Division Bench of this Court dismissed the M.F.A.No.8540/2015 on 12.06.2024 on the ground of delay in filing the appeal. Aggrieved by which, the petitioners approached the Apex Court in S.L.P.No.20149/2024. The Apex Court, by order dated 17.04.2025, partly allowed the Special Leave Petition by -5- NC: 2025:KHC:43354 WP No. 26755 of 2025 HC-KAR awarding `105/- per square feet for the land of the petitioners' land. The petitioners subsequently, submitted a representation to respondent No.2 seeking release of compensation in terms of the said Apex Court's order dated 17.04.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that deduction of TDS from compensation under the Act, 1894 is impermissible in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Vs. Ghanshyam (HUF)1 (Ghanshyam). He further relies on the judgment of this Court in M/s. Power grid Corporation of India ltd. Vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Mysore Division and Others2 (M/s. Power grid Corporation), wherein this Court applied the ratio in Ghanshyam's case and directed that no TDS to be deducted from the compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act.
1 (2009) 8 SCC 412 2 W.P.No.43215/2015 and connected matters. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC:43354 WP No. 26755 of 2025 HC-KAR
6. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the compensation due to the petitioners shall be deposited strictly in accordance with the order of the Apex Court in C.A.No.5309/2025 and as per law.
7. The proceedings relating to acquisition have attained finality. The Apex Court in C.A.No.5309/2025, while awarding compensation of `105/- per square feet held in paragraph No.4 as under:
"4. In view of the fact that the higher compensation of Rs.105/- per sq. feet awarded by the High Court for the adjoining land has already been upheld by this Court in Civil Appeal No.7587/2021 and other connected appeals, we are satisfied that the appellants are also entitled to the compensation at the above mentioned higher rate."
8. The apprehension of the petitioners is that 10% TDS would be deducted, as has been done in identical matters by the respondents. The Apex Court in Ghanshyam's case stated supra has categorically held -7- NC: 2025:KHC:43354 WP No. 26755 of 2025 HC-KAR that the interest awarded under Section 28 of the Act, 1894 forms part of the "enhanced compensation", whereas, the "interest" under Section 34 pertains only to delay in making payment after the compensation is determined. The relevant observations are, "interest under Section 28 of the Act, 1894 is an accretion to the value of the land and hence forms part of the enhanced compensation or consideration. On the other hand, interest under Section 34 is payable only for delay in making payment after the amount is determined".
9. This Court in M/s. Power grid Corporation stated supra applying the above ratio held that the interest under Section 28 forms part of the compensation and therefore, no TDS can be deducted on such payments.
10. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court in the case of Ghanshyam and this Court in the case of M/s. Power grid Corporation stated supra and the fact that the compensation awarded to the petitioner under Act, 1894, constitutes "enhanced -8- NC: 2025:KHC:43354 WP No. 26755 of 2025 HC-KAR compensation". The respondents are not entitled to deduct any amount towards TDS while making payment of the same and hence, this Court pass the following:
ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed. ii. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to make payment of the compensation amount to the petitioner as per the order of the Apex Court in C.A.No.5309/2025 dated 17.04.2025 without deducting any amount towards TDS. iii. Respondent No.2 shall deposit the said amount within eight weeks' from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order.
Sd/-
_____________________ JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA AT List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11