HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2607 OF 1999 AND CROSS-OBJECTIONS (Sr) No.97556 Of 2000 Dated: 30-03-2010 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer-cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Vikarabad. Appellant AND Hanmantha Reddy & 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.2607 OF 1999 AND CROSS-OBJECTIONS (Sr) No.97556 Of 2000 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) Since this appeal and Cross-objections are arising out of the common order, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. This appeal is preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer and Cross-Objections are preferred by the claimants under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘Act’) questioning the order and decree of Senior Civil Judge, Vikarabad, Ranga Reddy District made in O.P.No.43 of 1995, dated 29.01.1999. An extent of Ac.30.26 guntas of land in various survey numbers situated in Burgupally Village, Vikarabad Mandal was acquired by Government for the purpose of additional submergence of Sarpanpally Project by issuing draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, dated 1.6.1995, however, possession of the land was taken on 1.7.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting due enquiry and after obtaining necessary sale statistics, passed an award on 14.8.1995 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.9,000/- per acre as against the claim of Rs.50,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said fixation of the market value, the claimants-respondents herein filed an application under Section 18 of the Act for referring the matter to the civil Court 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.50,000/- per acre on the ground that they are small farmers and that the acquired land is black cotton soil and has got good potential value for its location under Sarpanpally project with good percolation for well irrigation, and that they used to raise commercial crops like Turmeric, Onion, Ajowan, Groundnut, Cotton etc., and get net income of Rs.10,000/- per acre per annum. In order to prove the market value, claimant No.6 was examined as P.W.1 and one more witness was examined as P.W.2 and a sale deed was marked as Ex.A.1. On behalf of referring officer, Senior Assistant in the Mandal Revenue Office was examined as R.W.1 and the award proceedings was marked as Ex.B.1. P.W.1 testified in his evidence that he used to raise commercial crops like Turmeric, Onion, Ajowan, Groundnut, Cotton etc., and used to get annual income of Rs.10,000/- per acre from the acquired land. P.W.2, the attestor of sale deed under Ex.A.1 deposed that in his presence one Malla Reddy sold Ac.3.00 gts. of land at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre and received the sale consideration in his presence, and that he was present at the time of registration with the Sub-Registrar’s Office, Vikarabad and attested Ex.A.1 sale deed. The land covered by Ex.A.1 is situated in Sy.No.168, and whereas, the acquired land is situated in Sy.Nos.164, 166, 171, 172, 183 to 188, 213, 214, 219, 220, 221, 223, 224 and 226 to 229 and 231. According to the claimants, there is a well situated in Sy.No.227, which fact has also been admitted by R.W.1 and from the said well they used to get water to irrigate the crops. The reference Court observed that the claimants failed to prove that they used to get Rs.10,000/- per acre by filing documentary evidence and that they failed to prove that the survey number of the land covered by Ex.A.1 is just abutting the survey numbers of acquired land and the nature of the land is similar to each other. However, the reference Court by observing that R.W.1 admitted that the land covered by Ex.A.1 is situated just one furlong away from the acquired land fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.15,000/- per acre. Sri N.Vasudeva Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-cross objectors would contend that the land covered by Ex.A.1 is contiguous to the acquired land and that the land to an extent of Ac.3.00 gts. under Ex.A.1 was sold at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre, and that the said transaction is just nine months prior to the issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and therefore, the claimants are entitled to the market value at the rate not less than Rs.20,000/- per acre as reflected in Ex.A.1. Considering the proximity of the land covered by Ex.A.1, though the reference Court relied on Ex.A.1 sale deed, which was taken place just nine months prior to the acquisition, which reflects the true market value as on the date of acquisition, however, restricted the market value to Rs.15,000/- per acre without assigning any reasons and in fact, taking the time lag of nine months into consideration, the value of the acquired land would go up. But, having regard to the fact that the people in the vicinity on coming to know that the lands are likely to be submerged do not come forward to offer higher value, at least, the reference Court should have fixed the market value at Rs.20,000/- per acre as reflected in Ex.A.1. Accordingly, we are inclined to fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.20,000/- per acre by allowing cross-objections and dismissing the appeal. The learned Government Pleader rightly contended that the claimants are not entitled to interest from the date of taking possession, but they are entitled to interest only from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act as held by the Apex Court in R.L. Jain (Died) by L.Rs. v. Delhi Development Authority and Others[1]. But the learned Counsel for the claimants would contend that the matter is pending before the Larger Bench of the Supreme Court and that the claimants are entitled to interest from the date of taking possession or from the date of issuance of 4(1) notification. But, as per the law stands as on today, the claimants are not entitled to interest from the date of taking possession and they are entitled to interest only from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. Accordingly, while fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.20,000/- per acre, we make it clear that the claimants are entitled to additional market value at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act to the date of passing of the award i.e. from 1.6.1995 to 14.8.1995 and interest on the enhanced compensation including the additional market value and 30% solatium at the rate of 9% per annum for a period of one year from 1.6.1995 and thereafter at 15% per annum till payment. It is made clear that in the event, the Supreme Court decides that the claimants are entitled to interest from the date of taking possession of the land even if it is prior to issuance of notification, the claimants herein are at liberty to avail the remedies available under law. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the cross- objections are allowed. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ MARCH 30, 2010 G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J. Tsr. [1] AIR 2004 SC 1904