HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO A.S. No. 3814 OF 2000 Dated 1st June, 2010. BETWEEN The Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalaguda. …Appellant/Referring Officer And Pacha Venkataiah and ors ….Respondents/claimants HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO A.S. No. 3814 OF 2000 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is at the instance of the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer-cum-Revenue Divisional Oﬃcer, Miryalguda, against the enhancement of the compensation made by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda in the judgment dated 26.07.2000 passed in O.P.No. 11 of 1989. The dry land admeasuring Ac.4.00 comprised in Sy.No. 547 of Miryalaguda town belonging to the respondents/claimants was acquired for the purpose of housing scheme of the A.P. Housing Board. The draft notiﬁcation under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 27.4.1984 and draft declaration under Section 6(1) of the Act was issued on 7.5.1984. After completing the due and necessary formalities envisaged under the Land Acquisition Act and on obtaining the sales statistics of the preceding three years from 7-5-1981 to 5-5- 1984 and relying on the award of the Reference Court dated 31.12.1984 passed in OP.No.20 of 1984 wherein the market value of the lands acquired at Suryapet was enhanced to Rs.85,000/- per acre with due deductions of 1/4th of it towards developmental charges, the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer ﬁxed the market value of the subject acquired land at Rs.85,000/- per acre. The claimants received the said compensation under protest and sought for reference to the competent Civil Court for determination of the correct, adequate and reasonable compensation for the acquired lands. On such reference, the Reference Court, which registered the reference as OP.No.11 of 1989. After receipt of the notice, the claimants ﬁled their statement stating that the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer while determining the market value arbitrarily deducted 1/4th of it towards developmental charges and that Miryalaguda is a fast development town and there are as may as 100 rice mills, 30 other mils, Industrial estates, oil mills, cinema theatres, Food Corporation of India godowns, junior colleges etc and therefore, they are entitled to higher compensation than ﬁxed by the Land Acquisition Officer. In order to substantiate their claim for enhancement of compensation, the claimants examined P.Ws.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.7. On the other hand, in order to dislodge the claim of the claimants and to establish the market value ﬁxed and compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer as adequate, reasonable and suﬃcient, R.W.1 was examined and Exs. B.1 and B.2 were marked on his behalf. The Reference Court after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, enhanced and ﬁxed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,40,000/- per acre by Award dated 26.7.2000. Aggrieved by the said enhancement, the present appeal is preferred. Heard the learned Counsel on both sides. Perused the material on record. The learned Government Pleader contended that there is absolutely no evidence to support the award of the Civil Court with reference to the ﬁxation of the market value to the lands acquired and that the lower court did not apply any proper and correct deductions towards developmental charges and erroneously ﬁxed the market value at Rs.1,40,000/- per acre. Smt. G. Sudha, learned Counsel for the Respondents 12-Housing Board contended that this Court in A.S.No. 1833 of 1985, dated 15.12.1992,which was marked at Ex.B.2 before the Reference Court, ﬁxed the market value of the acquired lands therein at Rs.72,000/- per acre after giving due deductions towards developmental charges and that the lands acquired in the present matter is also for the same purpose and from the same village and therefore, the same market value may be ﬁxed for the acquired lands. She further submitted that the LAO through 4(1) notiﬁcation dated 29.8.1980 acquired Ac.42.06 gunts of dry lands in Sy.No. 545,546A, 546B, 547 and 650 of Miryalaguda for the Housing scheme and awarded market value at Rs.43,000/- per acre and upon reference, the Reference Court enhanced and ﬁxed at Rs.1,20,000/- per acre with deduction of 1/4th of it towards developmental charges, i.e. at Rs.85,000/- per acre and on appeal in A.S.No. 1833 of 1985, this Court ultimately ﬁxed the market value at Rs.72,000/- per acre. Hence the same compensation may be ﬁxed for the land acquired in the present matter. At the outset, we may point out that the said submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the Housing Board is in ignorance of Section 25 of the LA Act and the same does not merit consideration. Merely because, this Court has ﬁxed the market value for the acquired lands in previous acquisitions, the same market value cannot be ﬁxed for the subject acquired lands though in both cases the purpose is one and the same. It is well established principles of law that the features of comparable or representative sales must be (1) within a reasonable time of the notiﬁcation (2) bonaﬁde transactions (3) adjacent to the land acquired and (4) possess similar advantages. The burden is always on the claimant like plaintiﬀ in a suit to adduce reliable, cogent and acceptable evidence to get the proper, just, and adequate compensation for the land acquired. If such evidence is adduced by the claimant, then the burden shifts on to the Referring Oﬃcer/requisition department to dislodge the same. Therefore, the contention advanced by the learned Counsel deserves to be rejected out rightly. The next question that falls for consideration is, what is the true market value of the lands acquired to which claimants are entitled to. On behalf of the claimants, third claimant was examined asP.W.1; a retired surveyor was examined as P.W.2; and an independent witness was examined as P.W.3 and exhibited Village map, market valuation Certiﬁcates said to have issued by the Sub Registrar of Miryalaguda, certiﬁcated copies of Registered sale deeds as Exs.A.1 to A.7 in support of their claim. The Reference Court, however, rejected Exs.A.2 and A3 observing that the rates shown therein were as per basic value register which would be for the purpose of collection of stamp duty from the prospective vendee for the smaller extents and that they do not show exact location. Ex.A.4 is the certiﬁed copy of a registered sale deed dated 23.3.1990 under which a vacant site in an extent of 121 square yards situated in Miryalaguda town was sold at Rs.24,200/-. Ex.A.5 is the certiﬁed copy of the registered sale deed dated 23.8.1986 under which an extent of 20 square yards situated in Miryalaguda town was sold for Rs.8000/-. Ex.A.6 dt. 23.8.1984 is the certiﬁed copy of the registered sale deed under which an extent of 18 ½ square yards was sold for Rs.45,000/- and under Exs.A.7, registered sale deed dated 15.7.1983, 203 1/3 square yards was sold at Rs.10,000/- which works out to Rs.2,37,160/- per acre. It is not in dispute that the purpose of acquisition of the land in the case on hand and in the previous matter is one and the same. The Land Acquisition Officer obtained as may as 719 items of sale statistics in respect of various survey numbers right from 7.5.1981 to 5.5.1984, and the extents purchases were smaller and their value were ranging from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.1,83,797/- per acre, but however, the proximity of these extents and its location were not shown in the award proceedings. However, the Reference Court relying on the Ex.B.2-judgment of this Court in A.S.No. 1833 of 1985, dated 15.12.1992, wherein the land acquired was for the same purpose, ﬁxed the market value at Rs.72,000/- per acre. The time gap between the two notiﬁcations is three years and odd and the acquired lands in both the cases are situated within the limits of Miryalaguda Municipality limits and quite adjacent to the town. Even if 20% escalation is added per year, it would come to more or less Rs.1,40,000/- per acre. In the similar acquisition, the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer awarded Rs.43,000/- per acre in the year, 1983 and on reference, the Reference Court enhanced the same and ﬁxed the market value at Rs.1,20,000/- per acre and deducted 1/4th of it towards developmental charges, and on appeal the same was ﬁxed at Rs.72,000/- per acre, which is almost double the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The same analogy can be accepted in the present case also, having regard to the nature of acquisition and keeping in view that Miryalaguda is a fast developing town. It is common knowledge, on acquisition of adjacent lands three years eight months prior to the notiﬁcation for housing colony, the land value tremendously will have impact on the phenomenal price in the urban areas. Even if sale consideration reﬂected in Ex.A.7 which is one year prior to acquisition is taken as comparable sale, after giving necessary deductions of 1/3rd, the market value comes to more than Rs.1,60,000/- per acre. In that view of the matter, the market value ﬁxed by the Reference Court for the lands acquired at Rs.1,40,000/- is just and proper. We see no ground to interfere with the judgment under appeal and accordingly we confirm the same. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. --------------------------------------- JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY ----------------------------------- JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Date: 01-06-2010. Msnr.