THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO L.A.A.S.No.579 of 2007 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) by the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) is directed against the order and decree, dated 13.05.1996 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Rajampet in L.A.O.P.No.1488 of 1988 answering the reference under Section 18 of the Act in favour of the claimants by enhancing the compensation of the acquired land. The facts, in nutshell, which are relevant for the disposal of the appeal, are as under: An extent of Acs.192.47 cents of land including irrigation wells and trees existing thereon comprised in Survey Nos.2/1A to 70 in Reach No.1 of Pattapurai Village in the erstwhile Sidhout Taluk of Kadapa District was acquired due to submergence under Somasila Project. The draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in the Gazette on 10.11.1977. The Land Acquisition Officer, after duly complying with the formalities under the Act, and by obtaining sale statistics for the preceding three years from the date of 4(1) notification, passed an award vide No.18/1979-80, dated 24.12.1979, categorising the land into six categories i.e., irrigable dry lands under Doruvu Wells as Category I; irrigable dry lands under Vogur-Vakamada Channel as Category II; irrigable dry lands under private wells as Category III; rain fed lands as Category IV; cultivable waste lands as Category V and uncultivable waste lands as Category VI and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.7,300/-, 6,000/-, 4,600/- , 2,000/-, 1,000/- and 250/- per acre respectively. He categorised the area covered by the trees as Category VII and wells as category VIII and awarded separate compensation to the two wells located in Survey No.39/2 and irrigation well in Survey No.65/4A on the basis of the estimates and the values prepared by the Irrigation and Power Department. Even though he obtained estimates and value of the wells located in Survey Nos.2/3, 7/1A, 7/2A, 33/1A, 36/1, 39/4, 45/4A, 46/1 and 36, he did not pay compensation for the same, but awarded separate compensation to the various varieties of trees existing in the acquired land. Dissatisfied with the fixation of the market value, the claimants, who received the amount under protest, sought to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. On such reference being made, the reference Court issued notices to the claimants. In pursuance of the said notices, claimant Nos.1 to 65 filed claim statements and claimant Nos.92 and 95 filed additional claim statements, whereas the remaining claimants adopted the claim statements filed by claimant Nos.1 to 65 by filing a memo to the said effect. In the claim statement, the claimants claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per acre for the lands under Categories II and III; Rs.12,000/- per acre for the lands under Categories IV to VI; Rs.4,000/- each to mango trees; Rs.1,500/- each to tamarind, soapnut, sapota, guava and coconut trees; Rs.400/- each to margosa, ravi and dirisenam trees; Rs.700/- each to drumstic and Rs.150/- each to palmyrah and date trees. To substantiate the market value of the acquired land as claimed by the claimants under various heads, on behalf of the claimants, R.Ws.1 to 8 were examined and Exs.B.1 to B.22 were marked. On behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, the Special Deputy Tahsildar was examined as P.W.1 and the award and award proceedings were marked as Ex.A.1. The reference Court, after carefully evaluating the oral and documentary evidence, fixed the market value of Categories I and III lands at Rs.18,000/- per acre, as against Rs.7,300/- and Rs.4,600/- per acre awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer; Category II lands at Rs.20,000/- per acre as against Rs.6,000/- per acre; Category IV lands at Rs.6,000/- per acre as against Rs.2,000/- per acre; Category V lands at Rs.6,000/- per acre as against Rs.1,000/- per acre and Category VI lands Rs.500/- per acre as against Rs.250/- per acre. The reference Court also fixed the market value of each mango tree at Rs.2,000/-, each sapota tree at Rs.1000/-, each tamarind tree at Rs.900/-, each guava and soapnut trees at Rs.500/-, each margosa tree (neem or vepa) at Rs.300/-, each palmyrah tree at Rs.150/-, each date, ravi, jammi, drumstic and sunkesula trees at Rs.100/-. Questioning the enhancement made by the reference Court, the Land Acquisition Officer preferred the appeal. However, no cross objections are filed by the claimants. We have heard the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition as well as Sri.P.Sridhar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants and gone through the entire material available on record. Under Ex.B.15-certified copy of the sale deed dated 06.07.1973, an extent of Ac.0.35 cents of land situated at Kurugantlapalli to Bheemavaram, was sold for a consideration of Rs.3,000/-. To prove the same, R.W.4- S.K.Allabaksh was examined. He deposed that himself, his mother and brother sold Acs.0.35 cents of land to one Chinna Subbaiah for a consideration of Rs.7,000/-, but in the said document, the sale consideration was mentioned as Rs.3,000/- in order to minimise the stamp duty and registration expenses. However, Ex.B.15 was discarded by the reference Court on the ground that the said document was executed more than four years prior to the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, and therefore, the same cannot be taken as comparable sale. Under Ex.B.17, certified copy of the registered sale deed dated 07.11.1978 an extent of Ac.0.40 cents of land in Survey No.676 of Kothur Village was sold for Rs.6,000/-, which works out to Rs.15,000/- per acre. R.W.2-Suri Narasimhulu, who is a resident of Poornampalli, H/o.Kothur and who is the vendee under Ex.B.17 deposed that he purchased the said land at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per acre, but he got mentioned the sale consideration for the said extent of Ac.0.40 cents of land as Rs.6000/- in order to minimise the stamp duty and registration expenses. During the course of cross-examination, he stated that he purchased the said land only for Rs.6,000/- as mentioned in the sale deed. Ex.B.17 was also discarded by the reference Court on the ground that it is a post notification sale deed i.e., executed one year after the issuance of the notification. Under Ex.B.18, registered sale deed dated 24.06.1974, an extent of Ac.0.25 cents of land situated at Kurugutlapalli was sold for Rs.3,000/-, the market value of which works out to Rs.12,000/- per acre. R.W.5, who is the vendor under Ex.B.18 deposed that he sold the said extent of Ac.0.25 cents of land for Rs.6,500/-, but the sale consideration was mentioned as Rs.3,000/- in order to minimise the stamp duty and registration expenses. Since the sale transaction under Ex.B.18 is more than three years prior to 4(1) notification, the same was also discarded by the reference Court. The learned Judge fell in error in discarding Exs.B.15 and B.18 on the ground that they were executed four years prior to the issuance of the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. The said documents can always be taken into consideration for fixation of the market value and if any subsequent sale deeds are available, the Court will also note the trend of increase in the market value from the date of such sale deed and the percentage of such increase will also be known by taking into consideration the said sale transaction. There is no rule under the Act that the sale deeds executed prior to three years of acquisition have to be discarded altogether and only the sales within the three years preceding the date of notification have to be taken into consideration for fixation of the market value. Be that as it may, under Ex.B.16, certified copy of the registered sale deed dated 29.10.1977, R.W.3, Chukka Narasaiah, who is a resident of Poornampalli, H/o.Kothur purchased an extent of Ac.0.20 cents of dry land irrigable under private well in S.No.668 of the said village for consideration of Rs.3,000/-, which works out to Rs.15,000/- per acre. R.W.3 deposed that he purchased the said land on 13.11.1976 under an agreement of sale for Rs.5,000/-, but obtained registered sale deed on 29.10.1977 for Rs.3,000/- in order to avoid stamp duty and registration charges. The recitals in Ex.B.16 also discloses that the said land was purchased on 13.11.1976 under an agreement of sale for Rs.5,000/-. However, the said agreement of sale was not marked to establish that the market value was Rs.25,000/- per acre. In the absence of the same, the reference Court rightly taken Ex.B.16 as comparable sale while fixing the market value of the acquired land. If 10% escalation is added to the same, the market value comes to Rs.16,500/- per acre and the same is not unreasonable for the reason that in 1974 the market value was Rs.9,000/- and Rs.12,000/- per acre and after three years, the market value was Rs.15,000/- per acre. There is 10% to 20% escalation in the market value and the same has been established by the claimants by marking the documents. Further, under Exs.B.12, 13, 20 and 22 the reference court fixed the market value of the irrigable dry lands at Rs.18,000/- per acre. In view of the same, fixation of the market value for Categories I and III lands i.e., irrigable dry lands under Doruvu wells and irrigable dry lands under private wells at the rate of Rs.18,000/- per acre by the reference Court is justified and the same needs no interference. Similarly, with regard to Category II lands i.e., irrigable dry lands under Vogur-Vakamada Channel, R.Ws.1, 7 and 8 deposed that they used to raise two crops like paddy, groundnut, turmeric, gingili etc., and get Rs.2,000/- to Rs.6,000/- as net annual agricultural income. Taking the net agricultural income at Rs.2,000/- per annum and by applying “10” multiplier, the market value of Category II lands was fixed at Rs.20,000/- per acre. Even the award of the Land Acquisition Officer also shows that in Category II lands, two crops were raised by the ryots. Therefore, fixation of market value at Rs.20,000/- per acre for Category II lands is just and reasonable compensation to which the claimants are entitled to. For Category IV and V lands i.e., rainfed lands and cultivable waste lands, the reference Court has taken into consideration the market value fixed in the earlier orders passed by it in L.A.O.P.Nos.248 of 1985, 189 of 1985, 125 of 1983, 215 of 1984, 1482 of 1988, 1480 of 1988 and 306 of 1987 covered by Exs.B.12, 13, 14, 19, 20, 21 and 22 respectively, where the market value of rainfed lands was fixed at Rs.6,000/- and Rs.5,000/- per acre and the same has become final, and fixed the market value of Categories IV and V lands at Rs.6,000/- per acre respectively. For Category VI uncultivable wastelands, the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.500/- per acre. Though the claimants are entitled to more compensation to Category VI lands, in the absence of any cross objections filed by the claimants, the fixation of market value at Rs.500/- per acre is confirmed. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition has not seriously contested the enhancement of the market value in respect of the trees, for which the enhancement was made by the reference Court on the basis of 10 years purchase with the income got from the said trees. For the foregoing discussion, we confirm the fixation of the market value of the acquired land and the trees by the reference Court through the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J ________________ K.S. APPA RAO, J Date: 30.08.2011 va