RANGEGOWDA vs SPECIAL LAO HRP-2, HASSAN Advocate - DGP — 31/2019
Case under U/o 43 Rule 1 Cpc R/w Sec 54 of Land Acquisition Act. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 18th March 2026.
LAC(APPL) - L.A.C.APPEAL
CNR: KAHS010002282019
Filing Number
31/2019
Filing Date
14-Jan-2019
Registration No
31/2019
Registration Date
14-Jan-2019
Court
PRL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN
Judge
336-Addl. District And Sessions Judge
Decision Date
18-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RANGEGOWDA
Adv. G.DEEPAK
Respondent(s)
-
1.SPECIAL LAO HRP-2, HASSAN Advocate - DGP
-
2.EXCECUTIVE ENGINEER, HEMAVATHI/YAGACHI PROJECT
Adv. DGP
-
3.The Chief Secretary, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore
Adv. DGP
-
4.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN
Adv. DGP
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
18-Mar-2026
JudgmentView PDF
Case Summary: LAC Appeal No. 31/2019 - Rangegowda v. Special LAO HRP-2, Hassan Court Decision: The appellate court partially allowed the appeal, modifying the lower court's judgment. Land compensation for property acquired for the Yagachi Reservoir Project was enhanced from Rs. 5,000 per gunta to Rs. 1,00,000 per gunta, with statutory benefits including solatium and additional market value. Previously paid compensation will be deducted from the total award. Key Reasoning: Applying principles of parity established by Supreme Court precedents, the court found that similarly situated lands in the same village acquired for identical purposes should receive equal compensation. Since comparable land in the same notification had been awarded Rs. 1,00,000 per gunta, discriminating between adjacent claimants would be unjust. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
18-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
21-Feb-2026
Judgement
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
07-Feb-2026
Arguments.
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
03-Jan-2026
Notice
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
16-Dec-2025
Notice
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
28-Oct-2025
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
13-Oct-2025
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
09-Sep-2025
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
04-Aug-2025
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
09-Jul-2025
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
25-Apr-2025
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
29-Mar-2025
Evidence
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
18-Feb-2025
Evidence
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
05-Feb-2025
Evidence
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
15-Jan-2025
Evidence
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
13-Jan-2025
Judgement
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
13-Dec-2024
Judgement
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
05-Sep-2024
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
29-Aug-2024
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
29-Jul-2024
Arguments
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
19-Jun-2024
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
25-Mar-2024
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
23-Mar-2024
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
27-Jan-2024
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
20-Dec-2023
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
02-Nov-2023
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
03-Aug-2023
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
09-Jun-2023
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
16-Mar-2023
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
17-Dec-2022
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
03-Aug-2022
Hearing
Addl. District And Sessions Judge
-
31-May-2022
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
19-Mar-2022
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
18-Mar-2022
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
10-Jan-2022
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
23-Nov-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
14-Sep-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
04-Aug-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
02-Jul-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
07-Jun-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
03-Apr-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
12-Feb-2021
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
11-Nov-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
20-Oct-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
01-Oct-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
21-Aug-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
27-Jul-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
11-Jun-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
15-May-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
20-Apr-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
03-Apr-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
04-Mar-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
10-Feb-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
17-Jan-2020
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
19-Dec-2019
Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
05-Dec-2019
First Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
19-Oct-2019
First Hearing
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
25-Sep-2019
Notice
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
21-Aug-2019
Notice
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
17-Jul-2019
Notice
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
18-Jun-2019
Notice
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
05-Apr-2019
Notice
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
20-Feb-2019
Notice
Prl. District And Sessions Judge
-
17-Jan-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
14-Jan-2019
Case filed
Registration No. 31/2019
Case Summary: LAC Appeal No. 31/2019 - Rangegowda v. Special LAO HRP-2, Hassan Court Decision: The appellate court partially allowed the appeal, modifying the lower court's judgment. Land compensation for property acquired for the Yagachi Reservoir Project was enhanced from Rs. 5,000 per gunta to Rs. 1,00,000 per gunta, with statutory benefits including solatium and additional market value. Previously paid compensation will be deducted from the total award. Key Reasoning: Applying principles of parity established by Supreme Court precedents, the court found that similarly situated lands in the same village acquired for identical purposes should receive equal compensation. Since comparable land in the same notification had been awarded Rs. 1,00,000 per gunta, discriminating between adjacent claimants would be unjust. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts