This study analyses and presents a technical comparison of seepage estimation from 11 empirical equations with measured seepage losses by the inflow-outflow method from two lined and unlined secondary irrigation canals sub-divided into different reach lengths. A significant margin of error was observed between empirical and inflow- outflow methods, hence modifications in empirical equations were performed. Results reveal that the average seepage losses observed in unlined and lined canals by inflow-outflow method were 9.15 and 3.89%, respectively. Moreover, only the Chinese equation estimated seepage losses for an unlined canal as similar to observed losses (0.11 m ³∙s ^–1) whereas the Indian equation estimated similar results for a lined canal to those observed in the field (0.09 m ³∙s ^–1). However, the rest of empirical equations were modified in accordance with error percentage with regard to the observed losses. The empirical equations were then observed to estimate reliable results of seepage.