IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO A.S. No. 1632 OF 1995 Between: T.Nabi Rasool and others ..... Appellants AND The Revenue Divisional Officer-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Nandyal and others .....Respondents The Court made the following : ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO) Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 26.06.1995 in O.P. No. 95 of 1989 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nandyal, the present Appeal is. The appellants are the claimants in O.P. No. 95 of 1989. The claimants made a claim before the trial court that they have sold only an extent of Ac.1.14 cents of land in the form of plots and they are entitled for the compensation amount for the roads exclusively. It is the contention of the respondents that they have purchased the property under separate sale deeds and their rights were conferred on the roads abutting the respective plots and they are entitled to get the compensation as per their respective sale deeds. After due enquiry, the trial court negatived the contention of the claimants. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed. Now the point for consideration is whether the impugned order is sustainable? The trial court framed an issue whether the seller conveyed all interests including the compensation in proportion to the extent of the plot owned by them. Before this court, in deciding this appeal, the aforesaid issue is necessary for consideration. Before the court below, on behalf of the Referring Officer, none were examined. On behalf of the Respondents 7 to 17, 17 to 21, 23, 25 and 26, RWs 1 and 2 were examined and Ex. B-4 was marked and on behalf of the vendors - respondents 2 to 5 and 30, RW-3 is examined and Exs.B-1 to B-3 were marked. The crux of the issue in this appeal is whether the claimants i.e. vendors conveyed their right in the property sold to the purchases under separate documents. It is admitted that as on the date of acquisition, the vendees were in possession of their respective plots sold by the vendors and the compensation was paid for the entire extent of land acquired by the Government. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants urges that the registered sale deeds executed in favour of the purchasers do not give any exclusive right to them over the roads and rasthas laid down in the individual plots sold to them. The roads and rasthas are retained by the vendors themselves as they have got some more land which is not sold and they wanted to have an access to the said unsold land through the roads over to the plots sold. The trial court after elaborate discussion observed that the sellers having sold some of the plots, cannot claim exclusive right over the roads and rasthas laid down for the plots which they have already sold. As per the award, out of total extent of Ac.2.22 cents, plots were sold to 29 persons covering an extent of Ac.1.14 cents and Ac.0.55 cents of land was left for roads, thus totalling to Ac.1.169 cents. The total extent of land sold by dividing the same into plots is Ac.1.69 and thus each of the respondents 7 and 9 purchased only 4½ cents and, therefore, the proportionate road site covered by their plot is Ac.0.01.46 cents. The total compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer is Rs.82,577.73 Ps. and for Ac.0.01.46 cents of site covered by rastha, the amount of compensation comes to Rs.2,198.81 Ps. As per the recitals in the sale deeds, the cost of site includes cost of amenities and other advantages provided with the site. The purchasers, who were said to be in possession of their respective site, are impliedly entitled to enjoy the amenity of the roads. It is common knowledge that whenever a vendor sells the property and conveys the rights to the vendee, his right in the property ceases, soon after the transaction is complete. In the present case, in respect of the plots the roads are earmarked for the benefit of the purchasers. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the trial court on proper appreciation of the evidence, has rightly recorded the finding that the claimants 7 and 9 are entitled for a sum of Rs.2,198.81 Ps. each in proportion to the extent of plot owned by them and all other purchasers also are entitled for compensation in proportion to their extent of plot owned by them and the balance of the amount shall be paid to the sellers for unsold plots. The aforesaid finding is in accordance with the evidence on record and does not call for any interference by this court. A perusal of the record shows that the appeal as against respondents 1, 3 to 8 and 10 to 23 was dismissed for default as per order dated 10.4.2001 and, therefore, no relief can be granted against them. Even otherwise, on merits also, the appeal is demerited. Consequently, the Appeal Suit fails and is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah __________________ Justice K.S. Appa Rao November 17, 2011 MAS