HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY LAAS Nso.221, 223, 439, 225,227, 228,230, 232, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 262, 263, 264 and 275 of 2010 along with Cross-objection Nos.10276, 10269, 11025, 10275, 10273, 10274, 10281, 10272, 10271, 10277, 10270,10294, 10286, 10295, 10282,10268, 10284, 10285, 10278, 10267 and 10283 of 2010, respectively COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice G.V.Seethapathy) These appeals and the Cross-Objections arise out of the common order dated 22.12.2009 in LA OP Nos.1 of 2007 to 21 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, wherein, the reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’), was answered by fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.25,000/- per acre and granting other statutory benefits. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the first respondent-Cross-objector-claimant. Perused the record. 3. An extent of Ac.164.04½ guntas situated in Sy.No.548/98 part and 548/139 part of Usirikayalapalle village, was acquired by the State for and on behalf of the Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Yellandu, for depillaring operation at JK-I and II Inclines. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 11.03.1988 and the same was published on 30.05.1988 and draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 25.02.1989. After due enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award No.2 of 1991 on 25.04.1991 fixing the market value of the acquired property at Rs.4,000/- per acre. Not satisfied with the award, the claimant, who is common in all Ops, sought reference to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. Initially, the Land Acquisition Officer rejected the said application by order dated 16.12.1996 and 29.01.1997 on the ground that they were filed beyond the period of limitation. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant filed WP No.13633 of 1997 before this Court seeking direction to the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the petitions to the civil Court. By order dated 27.01.2005 this Court allowed the said writ petition and pursuant to the same, the Land Acquisition Officer made reference to the civil Court. Before the reference Court, the claimant sought enhancement of market value to Rs.40,000/- per acre. According to the claimant, he is non-tribal and he cannot purchase any land in Usirikayalapalli village, which is agency area and he is entitled for payment of compensation on the basis of the market value prevailing in the nearest non-agency area i.e., Yelladu town. The claimant further contended that even for the lands situated in a remote village like Pocharam which is about 10 KMs away from Yellandu, in the year 1991, the market value was fixed at Rs.12,000/- per acre for KHT (rain fed) and Rs.7,000/- per acre for dry land by the Division Bench of this Court and subsequently, there was increase in the prices of the lands, but the same was not taken into consideration by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Land Acquisition Officer, on the other hand contended that the lands in Pocharam village have no relevancy to the acquired lands and the market value was fixed at Rs.4,000/- per acre for dry lands, and Rs.5,000/- per acre for rain fed, after taking into consideration of the relevant sale transactions and as per local enquiry. 4. Before the reference Court, PWs.1 and 2 were examined on behalf of the claimant and Exs.A.1 to A.6 were marked. The Junior Estate Officer, Yellandu was examined as RW.1 and Exs.B.1 to B.82 were marked. 5. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the reference Court held that the claimant is entitled for enhancement of the market value to Rs.25,000/- per acre from Rs.4,000/- per acre together with all statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the said common order, the present appeals are filed by Singareni Collieries Company Ltd. The claimant also filed Cross-objections. 6. It is not disputed that the acquired land of Ac.164.04½ guntas was situated in Usirikayalapalle village, which is agency area. The notification for acquisition was issued on 11.03.1988. The claimant relied upon Ex.A.1, Market value certificate issued by the Sub Registrar, Yellandu on 04.07.2008 in respect of the value obtaining in 1987 wherein it is stated that the value of the lands in Yellandu town abutting Sy.No.548 of Usirikalayapalle as Rs.36,000/- per acre. Based on Ex.A.1 the claimant sought enhancement of the market value to Rs.40,000/- per acre. Ex.A.1 relates to the Sy.No.609 of Yellandu town. Ex.A.1 was obtained in the year 2008 on the eve of enquiry before the reference Court. There is nothing on record to show that the said land in Sy.No.609 of Yellandu is abutting the acquired land in Sy.No.548 of Usirikayalapalle village. Even assuming that the acquired land and the lands covered by Ex.A.1 are both situated abutting the main road between Yelland and Khammam as claimed, no inference can be drawn that they are abutting each other or that they stand at par with each other and carry the same market value. 7. In the award Ex.B.1 the Land Acquisition Officer has referred to and relied upon the sale transaction mentioned at Sl.No.8 wherein an extent of Ac.1.20 cents in Sy.No.548/134 was sold for Rs.6,000/-, which comes to Rs.4,000/- per acre. The Land Acquisition Officer has mentioned in Ex.B.1 award that the said land is dry and similar in texture and soil to the acquired lands and the said rate was found to be reasonable as per the local enquiry also. When the direct sale transaction pertaining to the land in the same village of Usirikayalapalle village was available, the Land Acquisition Officer was certainly justified in placing reliance thereon instead of relying upon the sale transactions pertaining to the lands situate elsewhere in other villages. Ex.A.1 which is market value certificate obtained in the year 2008, cannot therefore be taken into consideration as basis for fixing the market value for the acquired lands, inasmuch as Ex.A.1 pertains to the land situated elsewhere and not in the vicinity of the acquired land. 8. The claimant relied upon Ex.A.2 which is the certified copy of the sale deed dated 08.04.1987 in respect of the land in Sy.No.516 of Usirikayalapalle village, wherein the said land was sold at Rs.25,000/- per acre. It is to be noted that the land covered by Ex.A.2 was wetland, whereas the acquired land is dry land and therefore, the value as mentioned in Ex.A.2 has no relevance insofar as the acquired lands are concerned. 9. The claimant also relied upon Ex.A.3 certified copy of the judgment of this Court in LPA No.222 of 1989 and batch dated 12.04.1990 wherein the lands situated in two villages i.e., Pocharam and Karepalle were acquired in pursuance of the notification dated 20.05.1981. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at Rs.3,500/- per acre and the same was enhanced to Rs.12,000/- per acre by the reference Court. On appeal, this Court remitted the reference back to the civil Court with a direction to fix the compensation, adopting the capitalization method. Against the said judgment, LPAS No.222 of 1989 and batch were filed and the Division Bench of this Court fixed the market value of the dry lands of the said two villages i.e., Karepalle and Pocharam at Rs.7,000/- per acre together with statutory benefits. RW.1 admitted that the lands in Pocharam and Karepalle are situated interior from the main road, whereas the acquired land is abutting the main road between Khammam and Yellandu. Ex.A.4 is the certified copy of the decree in Appeal No.2151 of 1988 wherein this Court reduced the market value of the dry lands from Rs.12,000/- to Rs.7,000/- per acre. The reference Court did not take Ex.A.4 into consideration on the ground that the certified copy of the judgment was not filed and Ex.A.4 decree did not disclose the names of the villages in which the said land was situated. Ex.A.5 is the certified copy in OP Nos.99 of 1991 to 123 of 1991, which were referred under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act and the said batch of OPs were disposed of on the basis of terms of compromise, where under the claimant and rival claimants have agreed to share the compensation in the ratio of 30:70%. 10. The claimant relied upon Ex.A.6 certified copy of the decree in OP Nos.135 of 1988 to 138 of 1988 dated 14.02.1994, wherein, the market value was enhanced by the civil Court from Rs.9400/- per acre to Rs.20,000/- per acre. However, the lands therein were situated in Bajumallaigudem, which is beyond Usirikayalapalle village. It is in the evidence of RW.1 that Bajumallaigudem is not abutting the road leading to Khammam and it is much interior from the main road. Based on the said admission, the reference Court held that the market value of the acquired lands can be fixed at Rs.20,000/- per acre, inasmuch as Bajumallaigudem village lands are much interior when compared to the acquired lands. Exs.B.3 to B.9 sale transactions were not taken into consideration by the reference Court in view of the admission of RW.1 in the cross-examination that Land Acquisition Officer has discarded those sales in Exs.B.2 to B.8 and the transaction covered by Ex.B.9 took place on 20.06.1982 long prior to the date of notification and therefore, Exs.B.2 to B.9 are not comparable sale transactions for the purpose of fixing the market value of the acquired lands. 11. The appellant herein relied upon Ex.B.10 wherein the reference Court has fixed the market value of the lands situated in Usirikayalapalle village at Rs.8,000/- per acre by enhancing the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.4000/-. The said OP Nos.87, 88, and 89 of 1998 were based on the same award dated 25.04.1991. The reference Court however refused to act upon Ex.B.10 on the ground that the appellant herein did not produce the certified copy of the judgment in those OPs. The reference Court observed that in the absence of the certified copy of the order in the said LA OPs, it is not proper and justifiable to rely upon ExB.10 for the purpose of determining the real market value of the acquired land. In the present appeals, the appellant filed the certified copy of the judgment dated 27.06.2005 in LA OP Nos.87 to 89 of 1998 as additional material papers. A perusal of the said judgment would disclose that the lands covered therein are also situated in Usirikayalapalli village and they related to the same award. The said judgment referred to an earlier OP No.170 of 1991 wherein also the lands situated in Usirikayalapalle village were acquired in the year 1981 and the market value was fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.4000/- per acre and when the same was referred to the civil Court, the civil Court fixed the market value at Rs.8,000/- per acre and the same was confirmed by the High Court by judgment dated 26.08.2003 in AS No.213 of 1997. As the market value of the land similarly situated as of the acquired land in the same survey number in the same village was already fixed by the civil Court at Rs.8,000/- per acre in OP No.170 of 1991 and the same was also confirmed by the High Court, the civil Court while answering the reference in OP Nos.87 to 89 of 1998 has adopted the same market value of Rs.8,000/- per acre. The lands covered by the said batch of OP Nos.87 to 89 of 1998 stand at par with the acquired lands of the present batch cases, as they are covered by the same award and therefore, the market value fixed by the civil Court in OP Nos.87 to 89 of 1998 affords reasonable and justifiable basis to fix the market value for the acquired lands in the present batch of cases as well. 12. The main ground on which the reference Court was not inclined to place reliance on Ex.B.10 is that the certified copy of the judgment in the said batch of cases is not filed. However, the certified copy of the common judgment in the said cases, is filed in the present appeals by way of additional material papers and the same discloses that for the lands similarly placed and situated in the same vicinity, the market value was fixed at Rs.8,000/- per acre and the same was confirmed by this Court also. It is therefore just and reasonable that the said value is taken as basis for fixing the market value for the acquired lands herein. However, as the acquisition of the lands in OP No.170 of 1991 took place in the year 1985 which was three years prior to the notification in the present batch of cases, which was issued on 11.03.1988, it is only just and proper that certain amount of escalation is to be allowed while fixing the market value. 13. In the circumstances, it is considered just and fair to fix the market value for the acquired lands at Rs.12,500/- per acre besides granting all statutory benefits. The impugned common order fixing the market value at Rs.25,000/- per acre based on the sales statistics pertaining to the lands situated in some other villages and particularly, Bajumallaigudem village is not sustainable, especially, when the material pertaining to market value of the lands similarly situated in the same survey number and same village as of the acquired land is available on record for the purpose of determining the market value. In the circumstances, the market value for the acquired land is fixed at Rs.12,500/- per acre and the claimant is entitled for other statutory benefits as well. The impugned common order is modified accordingly. 14. In the result, the appeals are allowed to the extent stated above and the cross-objections filed by the claimant, are dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: .01.2011 bss