HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.1885 OF 1999 Dated: 22-03-2010 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer & Special Deputy Collector (L.A.), Y.R.P. Unit-III, Peddapuram. Appellant AND Avasarala Subbarayamba (died) per L.Rs. & Another. Respondents. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.1885 OF 1999 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This appeal is preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘Act’) questioning the enhancement of compensation made by the Subordinate Judge, Pithapuram in O.P.No.29 of 1994, dated 05.11.1997 from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.10,000/- and Rs.8,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per acre for dry and wet lands respectively. An extent of Ac.9.12 cents of dry land and Ac.1.34 cents of wet land belonging to the claimant-respondent herein situated in various survey numbers of Lingamparthi Village was acquired by Government for the purpose of excavation of left main canal of Yeleru Reservoir Project by issuing draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 30.3.1983 and possession of the land was taken on 30.1.1984. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting due enquiry and after obtaining necessary sale statistics, passed an award on 8.11.1985 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.4,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.8,000/- per acre for wet land. The claimant having not satisfied with the fixation of the market value, filed application under Section 18 of the Act for referring the matter to the civil Court for due determination of the market value of the acquired land. On reference being made, the claimant appeared before the reference Court and filed claim statement claiming compensation at Rs.10,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.25,000/- per acre for wet land or to fix the market value on the basis of capitalization of 20 times the income. Since the original claimant died, his son came on record as legal representative. In order to substantiate the market value of the acquired land, on behalf of the claimant, R.Ws.1 to 4 were examined and Exs.B.1 to B.9 were marked. No oral or documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the referring officer. According to the second claimant-R.W.1, they used to get an income of Rs.10,000/- per acre by raising paddy and used to get Rs.25,000/- per acre by raising sugarcane and banana. Under Exs.B.7 to B.9, dated 1.6.1988 and 2.6.1988, the first claimant sold the land at Rs.25,000/- per acre. R.W.2, the neighbour of claimant, deposed that his land is situated adjacent to the acquired land, and that the acquired land yielded 30 bags of paddy per acre and after harvesting paddy crop, gingily and black gram were used to be raised in the acquired land and the claimant used to get 3 bags of gingily and black gram per acre, and that the claimant used to get an yield of 30 to 40 tons of sugarcane if sugarcane is raised. According to R.W.3, his land, which is dry-cum-wet, situated in Ramanayyapeta village was acquired and a compensation of Rs.11,000/- per acre was paid, which was enhanced to Rs.31,000/- per acre by the reference Court as can be seen from Ex.B.3, and that the said compensation was also confirmed by this Court in the appeal preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer as is evident from Ex.B.6. But, he admitted that his land is dry-cum-wet whereas, the acquired land is dry land except Ac.1.14 cents and that both the lands are situated in different villages. Exs.B.4 and B.5 are the sale deeds, dated 12.2.1982 and 5.4.1978 whereunder Ac.0.29 cents and Ac.0.15 cents of land, situated in Yeleshwaram village was sold at Rs.12,000/- and Rs.30,000/- respectively. The reference Court discarded Exs.B.4 and B.5 holding that no person connected with those sale transactions were examined. However, placing reliance on sale deeds covered by Exs.B.7 to B.9, which are post- notification sale deeds, and after giving due deductions, the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.10,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.15,000/- per acre for wet land. It is now fairly well settled that after insertion of Section 51-A by way of Act No.68 of 1984, when a certified copy of relevant sale deed is marked, the market value reflected therein can be taken into consideration without examining its vendor or vendee but only when the said presumption is rebutted, the same cannot form basis for fixation of the market value. The consideration reflected in Exs.B.4 and B.5 goes to show that the market value for the dry and wet land is ranging from Rs.10,000- 12,000/- and Rs.15,000-20,000/- per acre respectively. Further, the lands covered by Exs.B.4 and B.5 are situated in Yeleshwaram Village, which is one kilometer away from Lingamparthy Village. However, R.W.1 himself admitted that the market value of the acquired land in 1984 was Rs.10,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.25,000/- per acre for wet land. Considering the evidence available on record, the fixation of the market value by the reference Court at Rs.10,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.15,000/- per acre for wet land appears to be just and reasonable fixation and therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the said fixation. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. It is needless to say that the claimant-respondent is entitled to interest not only on the enhanced compensation, but also on the 30% solatium as per the law declared by the Apex Court in Sunder v. Union of India[1]. No costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ MARCH 22, 2010 G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J. Tsr. [1] AIR 2001 SC 3516