IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR A.S. No. 648 OF 1998 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit, Huzurabad. Appellant AND Kokkirala Ranga Rao and others Respondents The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (per THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH) For non-compliance of the order dated 20.09.2010, the appeal is liable to be dismissed against Respondent No.9 as his Legal Representatives are not brought on record, but in so far as the respondents 1 to 8 are concerned, the appeal survives. This appeal is preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) questioning the order and decree dated 21.08.1997 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Huzurabad, Karimnagar District, in O.P.No. 24 of 1996. The lands of the respondents – claimants have been acquired for the purpose of excavation of 5-L Canal of DBM 15 in the limits of Metpally village, Keshavpatnam Mandal, Karimnagar District pursuant to the notification under Sec. 4(1) of the Act and published in the A.P. Gazette No.73 dated 7.2.1985 and the award was passed on 10.1.1989 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.5,600/- per acre. Aggrieved by the award, the claimants sought reference of the matter for enhancement of compensation under Sec.18 of the Act. On reference under Sec.18 of the Act, the learned Subordinate Judge, Huzurabad by the impugned order, enhanced the market value of the land and fixed at Rs.11,000/- per acre and also granted other statutory benefits under the Act. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal is filed by the Land Acquisition Officer contending inter alia that the court below having rightly rejected Ex.A-1 sale deed, ought not to have accepted Ex.A-2 sale deed. We have perused the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge. It is the case of the claimants – respondents herein that the acquired lands are at a distance of one furlong from Metpally village and the market value of the acquired land as on the date of notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act was Rs.40,000/- per acre and the claimants used to raise chilly crop in the acquired land and their income was Rs.30,000/- per acre per annum. PW-2, who purchased land under Ex.A-1, deposed that he has purchased Ac.0.02 guntas of land at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per acre and the land covered under Ex.A-1 and the acquired lands are similar in nature, fertility and market value. Ex.A-1 lands are at a distance of twenty yards from the acquired lands. It is stated that PW- 2 purchased the lands under Ex.A-2 at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre, though the registered sale deed shows the market value at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per acre. The claimants have claimed market value at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre based on Exs. A1 and A2 sale deeds. Ex.A-1 sale deed is dated 12.10.1983, which is about 1½ years prior to the notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act. Ex.A-2 sale deed dated 7.12.1984, is also prior to the date of notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act whereunder small extent of Ac.0.02 guntas of land was sold at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per acre. Admittedly, an extent of Ac.1.00 was sold under Ex.A-2 sale deed. Though the purchaser stated he has purchased the land at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre, but the registered document reflects the value of the lands at Rs.10,000/- per acre. Therefore, the court below has rightly taken into account Ex.A-2, which is prior to the date of notification in the present case and fixed the market value at Rs.11,000/- per acre. We are of the opinion that the said enhancement fixing at the rate of Rs.11,000/- per acre is quite fair and represents the true market value prevailing as on the date of notification. Learned Government Pleader contends that the respondents are not entitled for the interest from the date of taking possession inasmuch as possession was taken earlier to the notification under Sec.4 (1) of the Act. The Supreme Court in R.L.Jain (died) by L.Rs. Vs. D.D.A. and others ([1]) has held that the compensation shall be awarded for the lands acquired under the Act from the date of publication of notification under Sec.4(1) only but not prior to that period, though possession was taken earlier to the notification. Of course, the respondents – claimants are entitled for the damages for having taken possession, if they are able to establish the damages caused to them. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the claimants are entitled for the compensation at the rate of Rs.11,000/- per acre and the interest and other benefits from the date of notification under Sec.4(1) of the Act only. The appeal dismissed in all respects in so far as respondent No.9 is concerned and is partly allowed in respect of Respondents 1 to 8 as indicated above. No order as to costs. ________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah __________________ Justice N.Ravi Shankar November 21, 2011 MAS [1] AIR 2004 SC 1904