HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2545 OF 1999 Dated: 30-03-2010 Between: The Mandal Revenue Officer (L.A.O.), Narasimhulapet. Appellant AND E. Ramaiah & Others. Respondents. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2545 OF 1999 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice G.V.Seethapathy) This appeal by the Land Acquisition Officer is directed against the orders, dated 21.1.1999 in O.P.No.83 of 1996 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad wherein the reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.10,000/- per acre for the acquired land as against Rs.2,500/- per acre fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. An extent of Ac.5.39 guntas of land belonging to the claimants-respondents herein, situated in Sy.Nos.23,24 and 26 of Jobbannapet Village was acquired by Government for the purpose of providing house-sites to weaker sections in the year 1989. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1896 (for short ‘Act’) was issued on 12.4.1987. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting due enquiry and after obtaining necessary sale statistics, passed an award on 20.09.1991 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.2,500/- per acre apart from awarding compensation at Rs.10,000/- and Rs.13,900/- for two irrigation wells as estimated by the Executive Engineer, Panchayat Raj. Not satisfied with the compensation awarded, the claimants-respondents herein sought for reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 (1) of the Act for due determination of the market value of the acquired land. On reference being made, the claimants appeared before the reference Court and filed claim statement claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per acre on the ground that land of similar nature in the vicinity was sold at the rate not less than Rs.14,000/- per acre and Rs.15,000/- per acre and commercial crops were also being raised in the acquired land with the aid of the water from the irrigation wells. During the enquiry, P.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were marked on behalf of claimants-respondents. On behalf of referring officer, Mandal Revenue Officer was examined as R.W.1 and the award copy and award proceedings were marked as Exs.B.1 and B.2. On consideration of the evidence available on record, the reference Court enhanced the market value of the acquired land to Rs.10,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the same, the Land Acquisition Officer preferred the present appeal. According to the claimants, the acquired land is fertile and commercial crops like chillies, groundnut and redgram were being raised under the wells and that the lands were also adjacent to the Village Abadi. In support of the said claim, P.Ws.1 and 2 testified as to the nature of the acquired land and the nature of the crops raised thereon and the yield they were getting per annum from the land to a tune of Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- per acre. It is not disputed and is also borne out from Exs.B.1 and B.2 that there are two irrigation wells situated in the acquired land which were also acquired along with the land and that they were installed with oil engine with which, the claimants used to draw the water from the said wells and the lands were under cultivation and commercial crops like chillies, groundnut, red-gram etc. were being raised. Even at a conservative estimation of the yield from the said land having regard to the nature of the soil and the nature of fertility and the irrigation facility available in the land itself and the nature of the crops raised thereon, it can be reasonably estimated that the claimants were getting income of not less than Rs.1500/- per acre per annum. The claimants sought to rely upon Exs.A.1 to A.4 sale deeds whereunder certain sale transactions also took place in respect of similarly situated lands in the vicinity. Under Ex.A.1 sale deed, dated 21.7.1987 an extent of Ac.1.04 guntas of dry land was sold to one Uppal Reddy of Kousalyadevipally Village at the rate of Rs.7,700/- per acre. Under Ex.A.2 sale deed, dated 13.7.1988, the land was sold at the rate of Rs.4,100/- per acre to one Managaiah. Under Ex.A.3 sale deed, dated 11.4.1989, land was sold at the rate of Rs.4,500/- per acre by one Achaiah, and under Ex.A.4, dated 11.4.1989, the very same vendor-Achaiah sold land at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per acre. P.W.4, who is purchaser under Ex.A.3 sale deed testified that though the value of the land was shown as Rs.4,000/- per acre in Ex.A.3 sale deed, the actual sale price was Rs.15,000/- per acre. P.W.5, who is the son of vendor under Ex.A.3 testified that his father sold land at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per acre but it was mentioned only as Rs.4,000/- in the sale deed based on the valuation noted in the basic value register maintained by the Sub-Registrar’s Office. It is well settled that the value mentioned in the basic value register which is meant for the purpose of collection of stamp duty cannot be taken as basis for fixing the market value in the context of payment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act. That apart, all the sale transactions covered by Exs.A.1 to A.4 having been taken place subsequent to the issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 12.4.1987 they cannot be taken into consideration being post-notification transactions for fixing the market value of the acquired land as on the date of the notification. The reference Court has rightly not considered Exs.A.1 to A.4 sale deeds as basis for fixing the market value. The reference Court appears to have fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.10,000/- per acre going by the nature of the crops, fertility of the soil and potentiality of the acquired land as can be seen from para 21 of the impugned order. Having regard to the fact that the land is fertile in nature and was being irrigated by drawing water from the wells situated in the land itself with the aid of oil engine and that chillies, groundnut and redgram were being raised, by adopting the capitalization method and multiplying the average income conservatively estimated at Rs.1,500/- per acre, the market value of the acquired land comes to Rs.15,000/- per acre. Under those circumstances, the market value fixed by the reference Court at Rs.10,000/- per acre, cannot, under any circumstances be considered to be excessive or unreasonable. The said market value at Rs.10,000/- per acre as fixed by the reference Court, does not, therefore, call for any interference. Similarly, the compensation awarded for the two irrigation wells at Rs.10,000/- and Rs.13,900/- based on the estimation made by the Executive Engineer of Panchayat Raj Department is also considered to be reasonable and the same also does not call for any interference. There are absolutely no merits in the appeal. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ MARCH 30, 2010 G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J. Tsr.