IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1543/2022 (LAC)

BETWEEN:

JAGADISH S/O BASAVARAJAPPA, MAJOR R/O HUNASODU VILLAGE Digitally signed by HOLALUR HOBLI, SHIVAMOGGA TALUK ARSHIFA BAHAR AND DISTRICT 577201.

KHANAM …APPELLANT HIGH COURT OF (BY SRI. RAJU BHAT, ADV.,)

KARNATAKA AND:

1. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIMOGA 577201.

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER UPPER THUNGA PROJECT SHIMOGA 577201.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RADHA RAMASWAMY, AGA FOR R1 SRI. PRASHANTH B.R. ADV., FOR R2)

- - -

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.12.2010 PASSED BY THE COURT OF I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CJM AT SHIVAMOGGA IN LAC NO.54/2001 BY AWARDING COMPENSATION AT THE RATE OF RS.105/- PER SQUARE FEET WITH ALL OTHER STATUTORY BENEFITS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON

19.01.2026, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

CAV JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) Heard Sri.Raju Bhat, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.Prashant B.R., learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Smt.Radha Ramaswamy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent No.1.

2. This appeal is filed challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 02.12.2010 passed in LAC No.54/2001 by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Shivamogga, seeking for higher compensation on the ground that in cases of similarly placed land owners, the compensation has been re-determined at Rs.105/- per sq.

ft.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appeal is filed along with an application seeking for condonation of delay of 3311 days in filing the appeal. It is submitted that the appellant is mainly dependant on the agricultural income and since the said land has been acquired, he is left only with a small portion of dry land, which is not sufficient for survival. After the said acquisition, the appellant undertook Coolie work and since the income was not sufficient to maintain his family expenses, he borrowed money from private persons. It is further submitted that in the year 2008, the appellant's son got married and at that time, he was required to borrow money as the award of compensation fixed by the Reference Court was not deposited immediately. Hence, he could not save any money for the purpose of filing the appeal and for payment of Court fee. It is also submitted that the compensation awarded by the Reference Court is very less and hence, he has made continuous effort to arrange money for the purpose of filing the appeal.

However, in the year 2017, the appellant suffered from issues relating to cardiac health and was admitted to Apollo Hospital, Bengaluru. It is contended that in the month of February 2020, the appellant approached this counsel and after discussions, he came to know that there was a requirement to pay the Court fee of Rs.5,00,000/- to claim the compensation at the rate of Rs.105/- per sq. ft. It is further contended that the appellant was not having money and hence, he returned back to his village. Thereafter, due to Covid-19 pandemic, there was lockdown and later, after lifting of the lockdown and after recovering to some extent from the financial crisis, the appellant approached his counsel and time was sought to arrange the Court fee and the appeal came to be filed and hence, if the delay is not condoned, great injustice and financial loss would be caused to the appellant.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant places reliance on the memos dated 05.08.2025 and 17.09.2025 as well as the documents produced along with the said memos. He also places reliance on the decision of the Co- ordinate Bench of t