THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, vs SMT. AKKAVVA — MFA /101947/2025
Case under Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act Section 74. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED AND REMANDED on 10th April 2026.
CNR: KAHC020081012025
Filing Number
MFA /101915/2025
Filing Date
15-04-2025
Registration No
MFA /101947/2025
Registration Date
09-05-2025
Judge
B.M.SHYAM PRASAD , SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Coram
B.M.SHYAM PRASAD , SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
MFA ( 124 )
Sub-Category
LAC-RFCTLARR (Right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition , rehabilitation and resettlement act) ( 77 )
Judicial Branch
Judicial Section
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED AND REMANDED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
Adv. K S PATIL
CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
Respondent(s)
SMT. AKKAVVA
Hearing History
Judge: B.M.SHYAM PRASAD , SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
NON-COMPLIANCE OF OFFICE-OBJNS FOR 1ST TIME
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-07-2025 | NON-COMPLIANCE OF OFFICE-OBJNS FOR 1ST TIME |
Orders
The High Court of Karnataka allowed the irrigation project authority's appeal, setting aside the lower authority's award of Rs. 3,80,000 per acre compensation for acquired agricultural land. The court found the authority violated natural justice principles by rejecting the claimant's request to present evidence and basing its decision solely on a prior judgment in a different case without considering the specific characteristics of the land in question. The matter was remanded for a fresh hearing where both parties would be given opportunity to present evidence before determining the fair market value. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Karnataka allowed the irrigation project authority's appeal, setting aside the lower authority's award of Rs. 3,80,000 per acre compensation for acquired agricultural land. The court found the authority violated natural justice principles by rejecting the claimant's request to present evidence and basing its decision solely on a prior judgment in a different case without considering the specific characteristics of the land in question. The matter was remanded for a fresh hearing where both parties would be given opportunity to present evidence before determining the fair market value. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts