IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY APPEAL SUIT No.2504 OF 1999 Between: Siribolu Apparao. … Appellant And Land Acquisition Officer (Special Collector). … Respondent This Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY APPEAL SUIT No.2504 OF 1999 JUDGMENT: - (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.GOPAL REDDY) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, “the Act”) by the appellant/claimant seeking further enhancement, is directed against the order and decree of II Additional District Judge, East Godavari at Rajahmundry dated 01.07.1999 passed in L.A.O.P.No.229 of 1991. An extent of Ac.2-74 cents of land belonged to the appellant/claimant in R.S.No.119/1,2,3,4 of Lingavaram village of Gannavaram Mandal was acquired for formation and submergence of Yeleru Reservoir Project and borrow area to Yeleru Reservoir Project by publishing draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act dated 20.11.1987. The Land Acquisition Officer after complying the due formalities by his award No.2/88, dated 12.04.1988 fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.12,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the said fixation, the claimant sought for reference to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Act, claiming enhancement of compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre and separate compensation for the open well and cattle shed. On such reference being made, the claimant appeared and filed necessary claim statement. To substantiate the claim of the claimant, R.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.B1 to B4 were marked. On behalf of the referring officer, P.Ws. 1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A1 to A8 were marked. The reference court after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and placing reliance upon the judgments of this Court in A.S.Nos.2733 of 1996 and 932 of 1997 marked as Ex.B2 and also Judgment of this Court in A.S.No.822 of 1997 and batch marked as Ex.B3 wherein this court fixed the compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre, enhanced the compensation by Rs.3,000/-, making it as Rs.15,000/- per acre. Hence the present appeal seeking further enhancement. We have heard Sri V.Manohar Rao, learned counsel for the appellant and also the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that though the reference court relied upon Exs.B2 and B3, the same compensation was not awarded on the ground that notification of the lands therein was on 06.09.1988, which is factually incorrect and in fact the notification was made on 03.10.1987, whereas the possession was taken on 18.09.1988. Since the lands of Lakkavaram and J.Annavaram villages are different contiguous lands to the lands of Lingavaram village and the terrain of the soil is same and the acquisition is for the same purpose, the claimant is entitled to the same compensation, but he cannot be denied the market value on the ground that the lands so acquired falls in the agency area where the sale transactions have been prohibited. He also brought to our notice that for the lands of Lingavaram village acquired through notification dated 05.08.1981 for the very same purpose, this Court in A.S.No.2067 of 1995 fixed the compensation for the lands where wet crops are raised at Rs.30,000/- per acre and for the lands where dry crops are raised through bore wells etc., at Rs.20,000/- per acre and for dry and pasture lands at Rs.16,000/- per acre. Since the claimant used to raise sugar cane and plantain crops in the acquired lands, he is entitled for a compensation of at least Rs.40,000/- per acre as claimed in the appeal. The learned Government Pleader fairly conceded the fact that the notification mentioned in Exs.B2 and B3 is 03.10.1987, but not 06.09.1988 as recorded by the reference court and also stated that for the lands of J.Annavaram, Lakkavaram and Ramanayyapet villages, the compensation was fixed from Rs.40,000/- to Rs.50,000/- per acre, basing upon the classification of the lands. In view of the above submissions, the point that arise for consideration is, what is the market value for which the claimant is entitled for the acquired land? POINT: - R.W.1, who is the claimant deposed that in the acquired land he used to raise sugarcane, plantain crops and used to get annual net income of Rs.20,000/- per acre. There is a well in the acquired land for which a meagre compensation was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer and there were no sale transactions in Lingavaram village as the sales were prohibited in that area. The village Ramanayyapet is by the side of Lingavaram and both the villages are separated by Yeleru canal and the distance between two villages is 2 miles only. But the acquired land and the lands of Lakkavaram village are situated side-by-side. Under Ex.B1- registration extract of sale deed dated 04.06.1987 of Lakkavaram village, an extent of Ac.0-50 cents was sold for a consideration of Rs.40,000/-, whereas for the lands covered under Exs.B2 and B3 Judgments, this Court granted compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre for the lands which are situated in Lakkavaam and Ramanayyapet villages. He admitted in the cross-examination that Lingavaram village is situated in agency area and the villages Lakkavaram and Ramanayyapet are situated in non-agency areas. He also admitted in the cross-examination that the lands of Lakkavaram and Ramanayyapet were having irrigation facilities like bore-wells, irrigation canals and tanks etc. The distance between the acquired land and Lakkavaram and Ramanayyapet is about 5 K.Ms and admitted that there was heavy competition in the villages Lakkavaram and Ramanayyapet. R.W.2, who owns land in Lakkavaram village stated that Ac.24-00 of land was acquired in connection with the Yeleru Reservoir Project and this court fixed compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre under Ex.B2. The lands in Lakkavaram and Lingavaram villages are separated by Yeleru canal and the fertility of the lands in both the villages was same. He admitted that the lands in Lakkavaram village has got irrigation supply like assumed supply, bore well, irrigation canal, tanks etc., and in the acquired lands the crops like sugarcane, paddy and plantain were being raised. As against the said evidence, P.W.1 the Assistant Engineer was examined to prove as to who assessed the value of the open well. P.W.2, the Mandal Surveyor, who prepared the combined sketch relating to the villages Lingavaram and Lakkavaram besides other villages deposed that the distance between Lingavaram and Lakkavaram villages is about 6 K.Ms., and the distance between the land in S.No.119 of Lingavaram village and the land in S.No.143 of Lakkavaram village covered under Ex.B1 is about 7 k.ms. The land covered under Ex.B1 is abutting the road leading to Ramanayyapet- Yeleswaram villages. Ex.A6 is the combined sketch showing the distance. P.W.3 the Mandal Revenue Officer stated that Ac.2-71 cents of land was acquired under Award No.2/88, where total extent for the land acquired is Ac.15.45 cents. He admitted that Lingavaram is in agency area and the sale transactions are prohibited from 1970 onwards and, therefore, there are no sale transactions took place in that village. Ramanayyapet and Lakkavaram villages are adjacent plain villages to Lingavaram. From the above evidence adduced by the claimant as well as the land acquisition officer, it is not in dispute that the lands of Lingavaram village which falls in agency area are adjacent to the lands of Ramanayyapet and Lakkavaram villages, which are situated in non-agency areas. For the lands acquired in the same village through notification dated 05.08.1981 the reference court by order dated 05.07.1990 determined the market value at Rs.6,000/- per acre for the waste lands left for grazing and thrashing purposes; Rs.10,000/- for the dry lands with dry crops and Rs.13,000/- for the dry lands with wet crops. As against the same, A.S.No.2067 of 1995 was filed and this Court by judgment dated 04.08.1999 (to which one of us i.e., AGRJ is a party) fixed the compensation at Rs.30,000/- per acre after taking into consideration various earlier awards passed by the reference court for the adjacent villages of Lingavaram, Ramayyapet and Kattumilli. The present notification is issued six years after the notification covered by A.S.No.2067 of 1995, dated 04.08.1999. Having regard to the fact that the reference court was of the erroneous view that the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act for the lands covered under Exs.B2 and B3 was made on 06.09.1998 i.e., subsequent to the present notification, which is factually incorrect and in fact the notification was published on 03.10.1997, much prior to the issuance of the present notification, the market value reflected therein can safely be taken as a comparable value for fixation of the market value of the acquired land. When this Court fixed the market value for the lands acquired in Lakkavaram village which are contiguous to the lands of Lingavaram village, at Rs.50,000/- per acre, the claimant in this case is also entitled to suitable enhancement of compensation. Further, this Court in A.S.No.2067 of 1995 fixed the compensation at Rs.30,000/- per acre for the lands of Lingavaram village, wherein wet crops like sugarcane, plantain crops were raised. Taking the notification as a base year and after giving 10% escalation for six years the market value works out to Rs.64,000/- per acre. As the claimant restricted his claim to Rs.40,000/- per acre, we fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.40,000/- per acre as claimed by the claimant. It is needless to say that the claimant is entitled to all the statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation, as per the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India {AIR 2001 SC 3516}. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. No order as to costs. __________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 04.03.2010 lmv