JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the Cross-objectors and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 2. All the cross-objections and appeals are taken up together for disposal by this common judgment. 3. Cross-objectors are the claimants before the reference Court in LAC Nos.31/2012, 33/2012 and 34/2012, respectively, which are disposed of by the judgment and award by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Indi. 4. The learned Additional Government Advocate places reliance on two judgments passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in MFA No.200630/2016 and connected appeals and MFA No.200626/2016. 5. The cross-objectors being the land losers are before this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and award of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Indi rendered in LAC No.31/2012, LAC No.33/2012 and LAC No.34/2012 and thereby the reference Court has been pleased to determine and award a compensation at the rate of Rs.3,52,000/per acre in LAC No.31/2012 & LAC No.33/2012, and in LAC No.34/2012, compensation at the rate of Rs.2,41,000/per acre has been awarded in respect of irrigated lands and while doing so the reference Court has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in MFA No.2020/2005. 6. It is the case of the cross-objectors/claimants that in the light of the judgment rendered in MFA No.31613/2012 and connected appeals, the cross-objectors are entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.4,15,000/per acre for irrigated land and would also place reliance on the judgment of the Coordinate Benches rendered in batch of appeals arising out of the acquisition of lands for the said project. 7. Percontra, learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that the lands involved in those appeals are situated in Afzalpur Taluk and the lands of the claimants are situated in Indi Taluk. Though they are acquired for the same project, it cannot be gainfully argued that the lands are to be valued accordingly. She would further submit that the reliance placed by the reference Court on the judgment rendered in MFA No.2020/2005 is inappropriate as neither of the parties placed reliance on the same and that the lands in question therein had been acquired for a different project and are situated in a different village. The said contention is not countered by the learned counsel for the cross-objectors. 8. The said contention is not countered by the learned counsel for the cross-objectors. 8. Furthermore, it is seen that though the respondents have remained exparte certain documents appears to have been marked on their behalf viz., Exs.R.1 and 2. It is further submitted that the beneficiary i.e., the Karnataka Neeravari Nigama Limited has also not been arrayed as a party and that the beneficiary is a necessary party in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court. 9. We are of the considered opinion that the matter requires to be reappreciated by the reference Court in the light of the materials produced by the cross-objectors/land losers. As rightly contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate, the reference Court has erred in placing reliance on the judgment of this Court rendered in MFA No.2020/2005 as it was neither the case of the claimants or the respondent authorities that the lands which are the subject matter of the reference are similarly situated as the lands involved in MFA No.2020/2005. The reference Court is required to address the issue with reference to the materials placed before it. The reference Court having omitted to do so, the judgments and awards stand vitiated and accordingly are set aside. The matter is remitted to the reference Court. The parties shall appear before the reference Court on 12.02.2020 without waiting for any notice from the Court. In view of the order of remand, the cross-objectors/claimants shall be entitled for refund of entire Court fee. The cross-objections and the appeals stand disposed of. Pending IAs preferred by the State do not survive for consideration, accordingly they stand disposed off.