HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO Appeal Suit No.903 of 1998 Date: 22-11-2011 Between The Land Acquisition Officer cum Mandal Revenue Officer, Pargi … Appellant/Referring Officer and Syed Sharfuddin and another … Respondents/Claimants HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO Appeal Suit No.903 of 1998 Judgment: (per K.S.Appa Rao, J.) Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 05-7-1995, in O.P.No.117 of 1989 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy district (for short ‘the reference Court’), the present appeal is filed. 2. Though notice was ordered to the 1st respondent, the appellant herein has not taken any steps to serve the notice and in view of the same, we thought it fit to dispose of the matter on merits. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Appeal appearing for the appellant-LAO and Sri Mohd. Ghulam Hussain, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. 4. The appellant herein is the respondent-LAO in O.P.No.117 of 1989. An extent of Ac.2-39 gts. of land situated in Survey Nos.56 and 114 in Syed Malkapur village belonging to the respondents-claimants was acquired for the purpose of house sites to the weaker sections through the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) dated 08-6-1978 issued by the Government and after due enquiry, the LAO awarded compensation at Rs.1,800/- per acre. Being aggrieved, a reference under Section 18 of the Act was made before the reference Court in respect of the claim of the claimants. In the reference Court, the claimants claimed compensation of Rs.200/- per square yard on the ground that the amount of compensation granted by the LAO is inadequate and unreasonable. 5. In the reference Court, on behalf of the claimants, the 2nd claimant was examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.A-1 to A-7. On behalf of the referring Officer-LAO, R.W.1 was examined and got marked Ex.B-1. Among the documents, Exs.A-1 to A-6 are certified copies of judgments in different proceedings before the reference Court as well as before this Court. 6. On over all scrutiny of the evidence on record, the reference Court in the impugned judgment enhanced the compensation for the acquired land from Rs.1,800/- per acre to Rs.5/- per square yard with all statutory benefits. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed. 7. The learned Government Pleader urged that the reference Court enhanced the compensation from Rs.1,800/- per acre to Rs.24,200/- per acre i.e. Rs.5/- per square yard, which is very exorbitant, which does not stand to the scrutiny of the principles under the Act and further urged that the finding of the reference Court is unsustainable. 8. Now, the point for consideration is : Whether the impugned judgment is sustainable and that the enhancement of compensation of Rs.5/- per square yard fixed by the reference Court is reasonable ? 9. Point:- The 2nd claimant was examined as P.W.1. According to him, the neighbouring lands were acquired for house sites and they are fertile lands and are at a distance of 1½ km. from Pargi town. It is also the evidence of P.W.1 that Pargi town is a developed town and there is much demand for house sites and he claimed compensation of Rs.20/- per square yard. Ex.A-7 is the document which reads that one Balaiah sold 288 square yards of site in favour of one Sadique on 06- 6-1984 for Rs.2,000/-. 10. Exs.A-1 and A-2 are certified copies of the judgment and decree in O.P.No.4 of 1991 passed by the reference Court, in which the claimants claimed market value at the rate of Rs.350/- per square yard for their lands in Survey No.24 to an extent of Ac.1-35 gts. of Pargi village acquired by the Government. In the same way, Exs.A-3 to A-6 were marked. Ex.A-7 is the crucial document, which is a certified copy of registered sale deed, dated 06-6-1984, for the lands to an extent of 288 sq. yards in Survey No.111 of Syed Malkapur village, which was sold for Rs.2,000/-. 11. It is the contention of the claimants in the claim petition that the acquired lands are very potential lands and situated in Pargi town. 12. As per the deposition of R.W.1, the acquired land is dubba chalka land, being suitable for house sites. It is also an admitted fact that the neighbouring lands covered by Exs.A-1 to A-6 were acquired by the Government for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections. Likewise, the present lands were also acquired by the Government for the purpose of house sites to the weaker sections. It is an admitted fact that through the evidence of P.W.1 that the lands in question are situate nearby Pargi town, which is a developed area. 13. As the acquired land is also on the same footing of the land acquired by the Government for providing house sites to weaker sections in Pargi town, which is very nearby to the present acquired land, the amount of compensation awarded by the reference Court at Rs.5/- per square yard, in our view, is very just and reasonable. Accordingly, we see no grounds to interfere with the finding of the reference Court. Therefore, the finding of the reference Court is confirmed. 14. In the result, the appeal suit is dismissed. No costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ___________________ K.S.APPA RAO, J. 22nd November, 2011. Ak HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO Appeal Suit No.903 of 1998 (Judgment of the Division Bench delivered by KSAR, J.) 22nd November, 2011. (Ak)