Karnataka High Court
Chandrashekhar vs The Deputy Chief Engineer on 25 July, 2025
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200843 OF 2022 (LAC)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202001 OF 2019 (LAC)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202002 OF 2019(LAC)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201011 OF 2021(LAC)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201243 OF 2021(LAC)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201470 OF 2021(LAC)
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201478 OF 2021(LAC)
Digitally signed by MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200404 OF 2022(LAC)
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: HIGH MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200405 OF 2022(LAC)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
MFA CROSS OBJ NO.200051 OF 2023(CPC)
MFA CROSS OBJ NO.200027 OF 2025(CPC)
MFA CROSS OBJ NO.200028 OF 2025(CPC)
MFA CROSS OBJ NO.200029 OF 2025(CPC)
MFA CROSS OBJ NO.200030 OF 2025(CPC)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200843 OF 2022:
BETWEEN:
SURYAKANTH
S/O SHANKREPPA
AGED ABOUT : 50 YEARS,
R/O: KAMALAPUR,
TQ: & DIST: KALABURAGI
PIN CODE: 585313.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. S. SUSHEELA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI SUDARSHAN M, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (S.C.RAILWAY)
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDERABAD (A.P) - 500 017.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI,
PIN CODE- 585 102.
3. OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR - DSGI FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN LAC 59/2016 ON THE FILE
OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT KALABURAGI AND
TO MODIFY JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.09.2021 BY
ENHANCHING THE MARKET VALUE AT RS 150 PER SQ.FT. BY
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS THROUGHOUT IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202001 OF 2019
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CONSTRUCTION, SOUTH CENTRAL,
RAILWAYS, SECUNDRABAD,
(ANDHRA PRADESH) REPRESENTED BY
SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION, S.C. RAILWAYS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ITABAI W/O RAMACHANDRA,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: KAMALAPUR, TQ: KAMALAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 313.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST.
COMMISSIONER AND
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR C/R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA, FOR R2 & R3)
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN L.A.C NO.24/2016 ON THE
FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI
AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 07.08.2019 PASSED BY LEARNED II
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN LAC
NO.24/2016, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202002 OF 2019:
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CONSTRUCTION, SOUTH CENTRAL,
RAILWAYS, RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING
SECUNDRABAD, (ANDHRA PRADESH)
REPRESENTED BY
SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION, S.C.RAILWAYS SECUNDERABAD.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MURUGEPPA
S/O SHIVALINGAPPA SHETTY,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2. PARVATI
W/O MURUGEPPA SHETTY,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
BOTH R/O KAMALAPUR, TQ: KAMALAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI- 585 105.
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
4. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST. COMMISSIONER AND
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR C/R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA, FOR R3 & R4;
R2 IS SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN L.A.C.NO.44/2016 ON THE
FILE OF ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI AND
ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 07.08.2019 PASSED BY LEARNED II
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN
LAC.NO.44/2016, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201011 OF 2021:
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CONSTRUCTION, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
SECUNDRABAD, (ANDHRA PRADESH)
REPRESENTED BY
SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION, S.C.RAILWAYS
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. MAHANTAMMA
W/O NINGAPPA
SAVARAGI, AGE: 46 YEARS,
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR, TQ: KAMALAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 313.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST.
COMMISSIONER AND
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR C/R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY, GA, FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN L.A.C.NO.17/2016 ON
THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI
AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 03.02.2020 PASSED BY LEARNED
I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN LAC
NO.17/2016, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201243 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CONSTRUCTION, SOUTH CENTRAL
RAILWAYS, SECUNDRABAD, (ANDHRA PRADESH)
REPRESENTED BY SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION, S.C.RAILWAYS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
-7-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
AND:
1. SRI PRAKASH
S/O LALU,
AGE: 42 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR, TQ: KAMALAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 313.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST. COMMISSIONER AND
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR C/R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA, FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN L.A.C.NO.36/2016 ON
THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI
AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 03.02.2020 PASSED BY LEARNED I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN LAC
NO.36/2016, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201470 OF 2021:
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CONSTRUCTION, SOUTH CENTRAL
RAILWAYS, SECUNDRABAD, (ANDHRA PRADESH)
-8-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
REPRESENTED BY
SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION, S.C.RAILWAYS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI PREMSINGH @ PRAKASH
S/O LALU,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR, TQ: KAMALAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 105.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST. COMMISSIONER AND
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR C/R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA, FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN L.A.C. NO.34/2016
ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
KALABURAGI AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.02.2020 PASSED BY
LEARNED I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN
LAC NO.34/2016, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201478 OF 2021 (LAC):
BETWEEN:
UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER
CONSTRUCTION, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
SECUNDRABAD, (ANDHRA PRADESH)
REPRESENTED BY
SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION, S.C.RAILWAYS, SECUNDERABAD
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SRI SHANTAPPA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA,
SINCE DECEASED BY LR'S
1. SHIVASHARANAPPA
S/O SHANTAPPA
AGE: 60 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR, DIST: KALABURAGI.
(AMENDED AS PER COURT ORDER
DATED:14.07.2025)
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH THE ASST.
COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADV. FOR C/R1(A);
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA, FOR R2 & R3)
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN L.A.C. NO.42/2016
ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
KALABURAGI AND ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.02.2020 PASSED BY
LEARNED I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI IN
LAC NO.42/2016, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200404 OF 2022 (LAC):
BETWEEN:
OMKARNATH
S/O SRINIVAS RAO KULKARNI
AGE: 81 YEARS,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: KALABURAGI-585 313.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. S. SUSHEELA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (S.C.RAILWAY)
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDERABAD (A.P) - 500 071.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI
P.C: 585 102.
3. OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR- DSGI FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA, FOR R2 & R3)
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN L.A.C. NO.61/2016
ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT
KALABURAGI AND TO MODIFY JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
29.09.2021 BY ENHANCING THE MARKET VALUE AT RS.150/-
PER SQ.FT BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS
THROUGHOUT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200405 OF 2022:
BETWEEN:
CHANDRASHEKHAR
S/O CHANNAPPA
AGED: MAJOR,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: KALABURAGI.
PIN CODE: 585 313.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. S. SUSHEELA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (S.C.RAILWAY)
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDERABAD (A.P) - 500 071.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KALABURAGI
P.C: 585 102.
3. OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI. PIN CODE - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY- GA FOR R2 & R3)
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN L.A.C. NO.57/2016
ON THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AT
KALABURAGI AND TO MODIFY JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
29.09.2021 BY ENHANCING THE MARKET VALUE AT RS.150/-
PER SQ.FT. BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS
THROUGHOUT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN MFA CROB.NO.200051 OF 2023:
BETWEEN:
ITABAI
W/O RAMACHANDRA,
AGE: 40 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: KAMALAPURA,
TQ: KAMALAPUR, DIST: KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDRABAD (ANDHRA PRADESH) - 500 003.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI- 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADV. FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY - GA FOR R2 & R3)
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
THIS MFA CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41
RULE 22, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE KALABURAGI DATED
07.08.2019 IN LAC NO.24 OF 2016 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT
THE RATE OF RS.91/- PER SQ.FT. AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS INCLUDING INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF TAKING
POSSESSION AND GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF, WHICH THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MFA CROB.NO.200027 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
SRI PREMSINGH @ PRAKASH
S/O LALU,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: GULBARGA.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
SECUNDRABAD (ANDHRA PRADESH) - 500 003.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI- 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R VIJAPUR-DSGI- FOR R1;
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY - GA FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MFA CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41
RULE 22, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI DATED
03.02.2020 IN LAC NO.34 OF 2016 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT
THE RATE OF RS.50/- PER SQ.FT. AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS INCLUDING INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF TAKING
POSSESSION AND GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF, WHICH THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MFA CROB.NO.200028 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
SMT. MAHANTAMMA
W/O NINGAPPA SAVARAGI,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: GULBARGA.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDRABAD (ANDHRA PRADESH) - 500 003.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI- 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI- FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY - GA FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MFA CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41
RULE 22 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COSTS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI DATED
03.02.2020 IN LAC NO.17 OF 2016 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT
THE RATE OF 50/- PER SQ.FT. AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS INCLUDING INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF TAKING
POSSESSION AND GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF, WHICH THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MFA CROB.NO.200029 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
SRI PRAKASH
S/O LALU,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: GULBARGA.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDRABAD (ANDHRA PRADESH) - 500 003.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI- 585 102.
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R VIJAPUR-DSGI- FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY - GA FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MFA CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41
RULE 22 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COSTS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI DATED
03.02.2020 IN LAC NO.36 OF 2016 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT
THE RATE OF RS.50/- PER SQ.FT. AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS INCLUDING INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF TAKING
POSSESSION AND GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF, WHICH THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MFA CROB.NO.200030 OF 2025:
BETWEEN:
SHANTAPPA S/O SHIVALINGAPPA,
DECEASED BY LRS:
SHIVASHARANAPPA S/O LATE SHANTAPPA
1.
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: KALABURAGI.
2. BHARATI W/O SHIVASHARANAPPA
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: KALABURAGI.
...CROSS OBJECTORS
(BY SRI HARSHAVARDHAN R. MALIPATIL, ADVOCATE)
- 17 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
AND:
1. THE UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER,
CONSTRUCTION SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAYS,
RAILWAY NILAYA BUILDING,
SECUNDRABAD (ANDHRA PRADESH)
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
KALABURAGI- 585 102.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
THROUGH THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER,
AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, DSGI- FOR R1;
SRI MALLIKARJUN C. BASAREDDY - GA FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MFA CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41
RULE 22 OF CPC, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COSTS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, KALABURAGI DATED
03.02.2020 IN LAC NO.42 OF 2016 AND FIX MARKET VALUE AT
THE RATE OF RS.50/- PER SQ.FT. AND AWARD ALL STATUTORY
BENEFITS INCLUDING INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF TAKING
POSSESSION AND GRANT ANY OTHER RELIEF, WHICH THIS
HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS AND CROSS
OBJECTIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 22.07.2025, COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
AND
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA
- 18 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA) The present appeals and the cross-objections arise out of the various judgments and awards passed by the reference Court in relation to acquisition of lands for laying railway lines. The claimants and Union of India (through Railways), have preferred the following appeals and cross- objections.
2. MFA Nos.200843/2022, 200404/2021 and 200405/2021 are preferred by the claimants assailing the judgment and award dated 29.09.2021 in LAC Nos.59/2016, 61/2016 and 57/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi seeking enhancement of compensation. The reference Court allowed the reference petitions in part and held that the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.24/- per sq. ft. for the acquired land along with all statutory benefits.
- 19 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
3. MFA Nos.202001/2019 and 202002/2019 are preferred by the Union through Railways assailing the judgment and award dated 07.08.2019 in LAC Nos.24/2016 and 44/2016 on the file of the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, awarding compensation to the claimants a sum of Rs.90/- per sq. ft. for the acquired land with all statutory benefits and MFA CROB No.200051/2023 is preferred by the cross-objector/claimant in MFA No.202001/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 07.08.2019 in LAC No.24/2016 on the file of the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi.
4. MFA Nos.201011/2021, 201243/2021, 201470/2021 and 201478/2021 are preferred by the Union through Railways aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 in LAC Nos.17/2016, 36/2016, 34/2016 and 42/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, awarding compensation to the
- 20 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS claimants a sum of Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft. for the acquired N.A. potential dry land with all statutory benefits.
5. MFA CROB No.200027/2025 is preferred by the cross-objector/claimant in MFA No.201470/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 in LAC No.34/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, MFA CROB No.200028/2025 is preferred by the cross- objector/claimant in MFA No.201011/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 in LAC No.17/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, MFA CROB No.200029/2025 is preferred by the cross objector/claimant in MFA No.201243/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 in LAC No.36/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi, MFA CROB No.200030/2025 is preferred by the cross objectors/claimants in MFA No.201478/2021 seeking
- 21 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 in LAC No.42/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi.
6. Brief facts:
The Land Acquisition Officer published 4(1) Notification on 25.11.2010 for acquiring the lands belonging to the claimants, situated at Kamalapur village, Tq. and Dist. Kalaburagi. The acquisition was taken for the purpose of laying the railway line from Gulbarga to Bidar. The claimants are the absolute owners of the lands acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer. An award was passed granting compensation at the rate Rs.45,500/- per acre for dry land and Rs.68,250/- per acre for wet land.
7. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants preferred reference petition under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('Act', for short), claiming enhancement of compensation
- 22 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS contending that the lands acquired are very fertile and irrigated lands. The land possesses N.A. potentiality being adjacent to Kamalapur and the lands are situated at only 200 meters from National Highway No.218 and the adjacent lands are converted into non-agricultural land and their village is provided with civic amenities, which has not been considered by the Land Acquisition Officer while passing the award. They further contended that the value of the said land was more than Rs.1,500/- per sq. ft.
8. There are three separate awards passed by the different reference Courts in relation to the acquisition of lands situated in Kamalapur village for the purpose of laying the Gulbarga-Bidar Railway line, under the same Notification dated 25.11.2010. In a batch of reference petitions, the reference Court awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.24/- per sq. ft. In certain cases, the reference Court awarded compensation of Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft. and Rs.90/- per sq. ft. Thus, creating a situation where compensation has been awarded at three different
- 23 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
rates despite the lands acquired under the same
notification, for the same purpose and in the same geographical vicinity.
9. Findings of the Reference Court while awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.24/- per sq. ft.
While awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.24/- per sq. ft. , the reference Court placed primary reliance on Ex.R.15, a sale deed dated 22.10.2009 in respect of plot No.37, measuring 30 x 40 (1200 sq. ft) in Sy.No.14/1, which was sold for a consideration of Rs.44,000/-. According to the reference Court, this sale transaction was considered to be more comparable and relevant to the acquired lands. The reference Court though acknowledged that Ex.P.29 and Ex.P.30 are proximate in time to the preliminary notification dated 25.11.2010 and that the properties were situated near Kamalapur Town, however, distinguished these transactions on the ground that the properties sold under Ex.P.29, Ex.P.30 and Ex.P.31 were
- 24 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS small plots, intended for residential or commercial use and all the three were facing major road or highway, which elevated their market value. The reference Court observed that Ex.P.31 dated 30.10.2009 an extent of 726 sq. ft. which was sold for Rs.75,000/- was presumed to have sold for commercial purpose and hence attracted higher price and in contrast, the acquired land are of a large extent and were agricultural in nature, lacking similar commercial development or immediate marketability. The reference Court rejected the sale deeds relied by the claimants and accepted Ex.R.15 as appropriate exemplar for determining compensation and ultimately awarded Rs.24/- per sq. ft. along with all statutory benefits.
10. Findings of the Reference Court while awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft.
While awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft. relied upon the sale deed dated 30.10.2009 (Ex.P.18 in LAC No.36/2016) pertaining to
- 25 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS open plot No.2, measuring 22' x 33' (726 sq. ft.) which was sold for a sale consideration of Rs.75,000/-. The reference Court observed that per square foot rate in the said transaction came to Rs.103.30/- (i.e., Rs.75,000/726 sq. ft.) since the acquisition notification was issued in 2010, the reference Court applied 10% escalation bringing the value to Rs.113.63/- per sq. ft. The reference Court placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. M.A. Aziz and Others1 (Aziz) following the Apex Court decision in National Fertilizers Vs. Jagga Singh(deceased) through LRs. And another2 (Jagga Singh) and held that the total permissible deduction on account of development charges and other relevant components should not exceed 60% of the market value. Applying this principle, the reference Court deducted 60% from Rs.113.63/- which resulted in net value of Rs.45.45/- sq. ft. and held that the claimants 1 MFA No.32505/2011 C/w 30207/2002, 200635/2014 and 200656/2014, DD:20.06.2014 2 (2012) 1 SCC 74
- 26 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS are entitled for compensation of Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft. with all statutory benefits.
11. Findings of the Reference Court while awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.90/- per sq. ft.
The reference Court while awarding compensation of Rs.90/- per sq. ft. for the acquired lands placed substantial reliance on the judgment in LAC No.163/2004 and connected matters. In that case, the Court had determined the market value at Rs.90/- per sq. ft. for lands situated at Mahagaon village, acquired for the same public purpose i.e., Bidar-Gulbarga new railway line project and under the same year of acquisition.
12. It is relevant to state here that in LAC No.163/2004 and connected matters, pertaining to lands situated at Mahagaon village acquired for the Bidar- Gulbarga new railway line project, the appellant - Railways had preferred an appeal in MFA No.201775/2018 and connected matters before this Court. This Court after
- 27 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS hearing the parties, allowed the said appeals and re- determined the compensation payable to the claimants by reducing the market value from Rs.90/- per sq. ft. to Rs.37/- per sq. ft. The claimants preferred Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court in SLP (C) No.8440- 8441/2021, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 05.10.2021. However, the Apex Court granted liberty to the claimants to file a review petition which has since been filed and is pending consideration.
13. The fact that the compensation in Mahagaon has already been scaled down judicially from Rs.90/- per sq. ft. to Rs.37/- per sq. ft. and affirmed by the Apex Court, unless overturn in review, becomes a binding precedent against awarding Rs.90/- per sq. ft. in Kamalapur, especially when the Mahagaon acquisition was relied upon by the reference Court.
14. We have heard Smt. S. Susheela, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Sudarshan M., the learned counsel appearing for some of the claimants,
- 28 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS Sri Harshavardhan R. Malipatil, learned counsel appearing for the claimants and cross-objectors, Sri Manvendra Reddy along with Sri Narendra M. Reddy, Sri Sudheer Singh R. Vijapur, learned counsel appearing for the Railways.
15. Learned Senior Counsel Smt. S. Susheela for the claimants submit that the reference Courts have awarded varying rates of compensation of Rs.24/- per sq. ft., Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft. and Rs.90/- per sq. ft. for similarly situated lands acquired under the same notification dated 25.11.2010 for the same public purpose, this disparity is arbitrary, discriminatory and violates the settled law that identically situated land owners should not be treated unequally and places reliance on the decision of Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Bal Ram and another3 (Bal Ram). It is further submitted that, the lands are situated at Kamalapur village, it is a N.A. potential land, just 200 meters from NH-218, adjacent to 3 (2010) 5 SCC 747
- 29 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS developed town Kamalapur, now a Taluka headquarters and the lands are fertile, irrigated and have commercial/residential potential at the time of acquisition. Reliance is placed on Ex.P.31, sale deed dated 30.10.2009, where 726 sq. ft. plot has been sold for Rs.75,000/- and value arriving at Rs.103.30/- per sq. ft. It is submitted if reasonable escalation of 10% is added, the value would arrive at Rs.113.63/- per sq. ft. Placing reliance upon Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (Registered), Fardikot and Others Vs. State of Punjab and others4 (Mehrawal Khewaji) submits that when several exemplars are produced with reference to similar lands, the one indicating the highest value and if it is found to be bonafide transaction should be preferred and in the instant case, the sale deed dated 30.10.2009 (Ex.P.31) is bonafide and is the highest exemplar and must be preferred.
4 (2012) 5 SCC 432
- 30 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
16. It is argued that deduction of development charges can be permissible for residential layout development and there cannot be deduction towards development charges for laying of railway line, places reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Nelson Fernandes and Ors Vs. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer, South Goa and Others5 (Nelson Fernandes). And also reliance is placed on the decision of C.R. Nagaraja Shetty Vs. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer and Estate6 (C.R. Nagaraja) and contends that no evidence was presented showing any requirement by the Railways for development and thus would contend that there could not be any development charge by way of deduction and the compensation has to be confirmed as per the sale deed dated 30.10.2009 (Ex.P.31).
17. Learned Senior Counsel places reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case Chimanlal 5 AIR 2007 SC 1414 6 C.A.No.117/2009 DD: 24.02.2009
- 31 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS Hargovinddas Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona and another7 (Chimanlal Hargovinddas).
18. Learned counsel Sri Harshavardhan R. Malipatil appearing for the claimants and for the cross-objectors would take similar contentions as raised by the learned Senior Counsel. In support of his contentions apart from relying upon Mehrawal Khewaji stated supra, he places reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Anjani Molu Dessai Vs. State of Goa and another (Anjani Molu)8 in the context of considering the highest of the exemplar for determination of market value. Deduction towards development charges, it is contended that the acquisition is for laying the railway lines and only in case the land is acquired for housing purpose, the deduction for civic amenities can be made, however, he would submit that in the event the Court would deduct towards the development charges, the normal rule for deduction would be 1/3rd and in support of this contention, 7 AIR 1988 SC 1652 8 C.A.No.8042/2004, DD: 07.12.2010
- 32 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS he places reliance upon the decisions of the Apex Court in the case of M.S.N. Nadaf (deceased) by LRs and Others Vs. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer9 (M.S.N. Nadar), U.P.Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Jainul Islam and Another10 (U.P.Avas) by the Full Bench where deduction of 1/3rd is upheld.
19. Learned counsel Sri Manvendra Reddy appearing for the Railways would vehemently contend that the compensation awarded based on reliable sale deed, such as, Ex.R.15 dated 22.10.2009 where 1200 sq. ft. was sold for Rs.44,000/- working out to 36.66 sq. ft. adding this escalation of 10% and deducting for development charges rounded off to Rs.24/- per sq. ft. was rightly arrived. It is contended that the claimants have failed to prove exact location, proximity and infrastructure similarity of the exemplars relied upon them. It is submitted that the acquired land is large in extent, Ex.P.29, P.30 and P.31 relate to small sized residential 9 AIR 2004 SC 3444 10 1998 (1) SCR 254
- 33 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
plots abutting highways or major roads used for
commercial purpose and the claimants exemplars are not comparable and rightly not placed reliance by the reference Court while awarding Rs.24/- per sq. ft. Placing reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Vithal Rao Vs. Spl. Land Acquisition Officer11 (Vithal Rao) submits that isolated sale transactions cannot be taken into consideration. It is submitted that deduction for development at 60% is permissible and justified and it is in line with the decision of this Court in Aziz's case stated supra and Jagga Singh by the Apex Court stated supra.
20. To the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the Railways regarding the bar in law to exemplars of small plots being considered, learned Senior Counsel Smt. S. Susheela would argue that there is no bar in law for taking the exemplars of smaller plots into consideration and places reliance upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Rishi Pal Singh and Others 11 AIR 2017 SC 3330
- 34 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS Vs. Meerut Development Authority and Another12 (Rishi Pal Singh).
21. Having heard the learned counsel for both sides, the point that arises for consideration is:
"Whether the judgments and awards passed by the reference Court is in line with the settled proposition of law and whether same warrants any interference in the present facts and circumstances?"
22. It is pertinent to note that the conversion potential of the acquired lands is not much in dispute particularly in view of the fact that the Railways have not challenged the award of compensation at the rate of Rs.24/- per sq. ft. Therefore, in the absence of any appeal against award of Rs.24/- per sq. ft. by the acquiring body, the only remaining legal issue is the extent of enhancement to be awarded based on bonafide, proximate and higher value exemplars, after applying reasonable deductions.
12
AIR 2006 SC 3572
- 35 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
23. The claimants relied upon the following
exemplar for determination of market value of the
acquired land:
i. Ex.P.29- Sale deed dated 07.06.2010 in respect
of Plot No.24 measuring 30 x 40 in Sy.No.19/1 for consideration of Rs.96,000/- which works out Rs.80/- per sq. ft. (96,000/1,200).
ii. Ex.P.30- Sale deed dated 07.06.2010 in respect of Plot No.21 measuring 40 x 40 in Sy.No.19/1 for consideration of Rs.1,27,000/- which works out Rs.79.38 per sq. ft. (1,27,000/1,600). iii. Ex.P.31- Sale deed dated 30.10.2009 in respect of Plot No.2 measuring 22 x 33 sold for Rs.75,000/- which works out Rs.103.31 per sq. ft. (75,000/726).
24. And the Railways relied upon the following exemplar for determination of market value of the acquired land:
- 36 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
i. Ex.R.5- Sale deed dated 20.02.2009 in respect of
Sy.No.390/2 measuring 2362.5 sq ft. for
consideration of Rs.1,50,000/- which works out Rs.63.49/- per sq. ft. (1,50,000/2362.5). ii. Ex.R.6- Sale deed dated 27.01.2010 in respect of Plot No.139 measuring 30 x 40 for consideration of Rs.44,000/- which works out Rs.36.67 per sq. ft. (44,000/1,200).
iii. Ex.R.12- Sale deed dated 09.10.2009 in respect of Plot No.17 in Sy.No.19/1 measuring 30 x 50 for consideration of Rs.40,000/- which works out Rs.26.67 per sq. ft. (40,000/1,500). iv. Ex.R.13- Sale deed dated 28.05.2009 in respect of Plot No.5 in Sy.No.4/A1 measuring 30 x 40 for consideration of Rs.36,000/- which works out Rs.30 per sq. ft. (36,000/1,200).
v. Ex.R.14- Sale deed dated 16.05.2011 in respect of Plot No.24/1 in Sy.No.390/2 measuring 30 x
- 37 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS 40 for consideration of Rs.54,000/- which works out Rs.45 per sq. ft. (54,000/1,200).
vi. Ex.R.15- Sale deed dated 22.10.2009 in respect of Plot No.37 in Sy.No.14/1 measuring 30 x 40 for consideration of Rs.44,000/- which works out Rs.36.67 per sq. ft. (44,000/1,200).
25. Methodology of determination:
The Apex Court in the case of Chimanlal Hargovinddas stated supra emphasized that the sale deeds must be proximate in time, location and nature, and bonafide. If all criteria are met, highest exemplar is to be preferred. The Apex Court has held the following factors to be borne in mind while determining the market value of the land.
(1) Determined as on the crucial date of publication of the modification under S.4 of the Land Acquisition Act 9dates of Notification under Ss.6 and 9 are irrelevant) (2) The determination has to be made standing on the date line of valuation (date of publication of notification under Section 4) as if the valuer is a
- 38 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS hypothetical purchaser willing to purchase land from the open market and is prepared to pay a reasonable price as on that day. It has also to be assumed that the vendor is willing to sell the land at a reasonable price.
(3) In doing so by the instances method, the court has to correlate the market value reflected in the most comparable instance which provides the index of market value.
(4) Only genuine instances have to be taken into account. (Sometimes instances are rigged up in anticipation of acquisition of land). (5) Even post-notification instances can be taken into account (1) if they are very proximate, (2) genuine and (3) the acquisition itself has not motivated the purchaser to pay a higher price on account of the resultant improvement in development prospects.
(6) The most comparable instances out of the genuine instances have to be identified on the following considerations:
(i) proximity from time angle,
(ii) proximity from situation angle. (7) Having identified the instances which provide the index of market value the price reflected therein may be taken as the norm and the market value of the land under acquisition may be deduced by making suitable adjustments for the plus and minus factors vis-à-vis land under acquisition by placing the two in juxtaposition.
(8) A balance-sheet of plus and minus factors may be drawn for this purpose and the relevant factors
- 39 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS may be evaluated in terms of price variation as a prudent purchaser would do.
(9) The market value of the land under acquisition has thereafter to be deduced by loading the price reflected in the instance taken as norm for plus factors and unloading it for minus factors."
26. The "highest exemplar rule" is a settled principle of law in land acquisition matters. It means that when multiple sale instances (exemplars) are available and bonafide, the highest price transaction should be adopted to determine the market value of the acquired land. The Apex Court in the case of Mehrawal Khewaji stated supra held that "when there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, it is the general rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied that it is a bonafide transaction, has to be considered and accepted. When the land is being compulsorily taken away from a person, he is entitled to the highest value with similar land in the locality is shown to have fetched in a bonafide transaction entered into between a willing purchaser and a willing seller near about the time of acquisition. In our
- 40 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS view, it seems to be only fair that where sale deeds pertaining to different transactions are relied on behalf of the Government, the transaction representing the highest value should be preferred to the rest unless there are strong circumstances justifying a different Course. It is not desirable to take an average of various sale deeds placed before the authority/Court for fixing fair compensation."
27. Similarly, the Apex Court in the case of Anjani Molu stated supra held that "the legal position is that even where there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, usually the highest exemplars which is a bonafide transaction, will be considered". The relevant para No.13, reads as under:
"13. The legal position is that even where there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, usually the highest of the exemplars, which is a bona fide transaction, will be considered. Where however there are several sales of similar lands whose prices range in a narrow bandwidth, the
- 41 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS average thereof can be taken, as representing the market price. But where the values disclosed in respect of two sales are markedly different, it can only lead to an inference that they are with reference to dissimilar lands or that the lower value sale is on account of under-valuation or other price depressing reasons. Consequently averaging can not be resorted to. We may refer to two decisions of this Court in this behalf "
28. The Apex Court in the case of Bal Ram stated supra emphasized that it is unfair to discriminate between the land owners to pay more to some and less to others when the purpose of acquisition is same and lands are identical and similar, though lying in different villages and held that implicitly requiring the highest value exemplar to ensure equal treatment.
29. The Apex Court in the case of Rishi Pal Singh stated supra has held that there is no bar in law to exemplars of small plots being considered.
- 42 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
30. Bearing in mind the settled proposition of law in the decisions stated supra, the genuine and bonafide transaction proximate to the point of acquisition of the land situated in the neighborhood of the acquired lands possessing similar value has to be considered. The highest value exemplar in the several sale instances is Ex.P.31 dated 30.10.2009 in respect of plot No.21, measuring 726 sq. ft. sold for Rs.75,000/- has to be taken as a highest bonafide exemplar (Rs.75,000 / 726 sq.ft.) comes to Rs.103.30/- per sq. ft. adding 10% since the date of acquisition is of the year 2010, the market value would come to Rs.113.63/- per sq. ft.
31. Deduction towards development charges:
When exemplars of small developed plots are used to determine the market value of large lands, deductions are applied for development charges. In the case of U.P. Avas by the Full Bench of the Supreme Court stated supra held that when sale instances of small developed plots to determine compensation for large land, 1/3rd deduction is
- 43 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS appropriate to account for development cost and land to be set aside for public use. The Apex Court in Mehrawal Khewaji held that deduction must be reasonable and not arbitrary, and Courts should examine the nature, location and purpose of acquisition. If the land has developed potential or abuts urban areas, lower deduction 25% to 30% may suffice. Even in Aziz's case stated supra, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held that the total deductions for development and other factors must not exceed 60%. The Apex Court in the case of Nelson Fernandes stated supra observed that in projects like railway line, no land is used for amenities or left open so development deduction is irrelevant. In C.R. Nagaraja's case, the Apex Court observed that "where the lands are acquired for public purpose like setting up of industries or setting up of housing colonies or other such allied purposes, the acquiring body would be entitled to deduct some amount from the payable compensation on account of development charges, however, it has to be established
- 44 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS by positive evidence that such development charges are justified."
32. In the instant case, we do not find any such discussion or evidence put-forth by the Railways to show the possible expenditure for such development. The land acquired in the instant cases are development potential, acquired for railway lines, especially near developed area, like Kamalapur and in light of the decision narrated supra, the deduction towards development charges which we feel appropriate is 1/3rd i.e. 33.33% to be reasonable. Thus, taking that the nature of the land acquired is N.A. potential land and to some extent in large, the purpose of acquisition is for laying railway line, the development requirement is minimal as no internal development, like parks, roads, etc. is required for railway projects, the exemplar sale deed taken is dated 30.10.2009 plot size 726 sq. ft. at Rs.75,000/-. The compensation that would be arrived is Rs.75,000 / 726 sq. ft., the price per sq. ft. comes to Rs.103.30/-, escalation for one year at the rate
- 45 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS of 10% since the notification is of the year 2010, it comes to Rs.113.63/- per sq. ft. applying 1/3rd deduction i.e., 33.33% of Rs.113.63/- comes to Rs.37.87/-. The compensation that is arrived is Rs.75.76/- per sq. ft. (Rs.113.65 - Rs.37.87). Accordingly, the point raised for consideration is answered, and we pass the following:
ORDER
i) MFA Nos.200843/2022, 200404/2021 and 200405/2021 preferred by the claimants are hereby allowed in part with costs, the judgment and award dated 29.09.2021 in LAC Nos.59/2016, 61/2016 and 57/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi are hereby modified holding that the claimants are entitled for Rs.75.76/- per sq. ft. with statutory benefits with admissible additions as against a sum of Rs.24/- per sq. ft. awarded by the reference Court.
- 46 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
ii) MFA Nos.201011/2021, MFA
No.201243/2021, 201470/2021, 201478/2021
preferred by the Railways challenging the
judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 in LAC Nos.17/2016, 36/2016, 34/2016, 42/2016 on the file of the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi are hereby dismissed and the MFA CROB No.200027/2025, MFA CROB No.200028/2025, MFA CROB No.200029/2025, MFA CROB No.200030/2025 preferred by the cross-objectors/claimants in the present appeals are hereby allowed in part with costs and the judgment and award dated 03.02.2020 passed by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Kalaburagi are hereby modified holding that the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.75.76/- per sq. ft. with statutory benefits with admissible additions as against Rs.45.45/- per sq. ft. awarded by the reference Court.
- 47 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB MFA No. 200843 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019 MFA No. 202002 of 2019 HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
iii) MFA Nos.202001/2019, 202002/2019 preferred by the Railways are allowed in part, reducing the compensation to Rs.75.76/- per sq. ft. as against Rs.90/- per sq. ft. awarded by the reference Court. In light of allowing of the appeals in part preferred by the Railways, MFA CROB No.200051/2023 preferred by the cross-objector/claimant seeking enhancement over and above Rs.90/- per sq. ft. is hereby dismissed. The claimants are entitled for Rs.75.76/- per sq. ft. with statutory benefits with admissible additions as against a sum of Rs.90/- per sq. ft. awarded by the reference Court.
iv) Deficit Court fee if any payable by claimants to be paid within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
- 48 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:4227-DB
MFA No. 200843 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 202001 of 2019
MFA No. 202002 of 2019
HC-KAR AND 11 OTHERS
v) Interest on delay period to be
excluded.
Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(K S HEMALEKHA)
JUDGE
BL
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3
CT:NI