HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR A.S. No.1501 OF 2000 AND Cross-Objections (Sr). No.49701 OF 2004 DATED:14-10-2009 BETWEEN: Land Acquisition Officer, (Mandal Revenue Officer), Pitlam. …Appellant And Narsing Rao, S/o.Chandraiah (died per L.Rs.) …Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR A.S. No.1501 OF 2000 AND Cross-Objections (Sr). No.49701 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Chandra Kumar) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act is preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer Challenging the order passed by the Subordinate Judge, Bodhan, dated 12.12.1996 in O.P.No.16 of 1991 fixing the compensation at the rate of Rs.5/- per sq.yd. for the acquired land and deducting 1/5th out of the same for developmental purpose. Whereas, the claimant- respondent filed the cross-objections seeking further enhancement of compensation at Rs.38,000/- per acre. The brief facts of the case are as follows: An extent of Ac.2.00 gts. of dry land in Sy.No.1/AA of Paredpalli Village of the erstwhile Banswada Taluk, presently in Pitlam Mandal belonging to the respondent was acquired for the purpose of providing house-sites to weaker sections of the society by issuing draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 31.8.1982 and possession was taken over by the Government on 30.9.1982. The Land Acquisition Officer after conducting enquiry, passed an award on 30.11.1993 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3,000/- per acre. Originally, the father of the respondent herein aggrieved by the said compensation, filed an application to refer the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18(1) of the Act. However, before the case was referred to the Civil Court, the father of the respondent herein died and therefore, the present respondent came on record as legal heir of his father. The legal heir of the original claimant shall be referred as claimant hereinafter for the sake of convenience. The claimant filed a claim statement before the reference Court claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.50/- per sq.yd. In order to prove the prevailing market value as on the date of draft notification, the claimant himself examined as P.W.1 apart from examining three more witnesses on his behalf and Ex.A.1- protest petition, dated 20.3.1993 and Ex.A.2-C.C. of judgment in O.P.No.24 of 1990 were marked. On behalf of referring officer, R.W.1 was examined and the copy of proceedings of Tahsildar, Bhanswada was marked as Ex.B.1. The reference Court after evaluation of oral and documentary evidence and taking into consideration the award in O.P.No.61 of 1987 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Bhodan, fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.5/- per sq.yd. for the 4/5th of the total area after deducting 1/5t h area towards developmental charges. Aggrieved thereby, the Land Acquisition Officer preferred the present appeal. Whereas, the claimant- respondent filed the cross-objections seeking further enhancement of compensation at Rs.38,000/- per acre. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals submitted that the reference Court erred in relying on Ex.A.2 and erroneously awarded the compensation at the higher rate. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondent submitted that the order passed in O.P.No.24 of 1990 marked as Ex.A.2 was challenged by the Land Acquisition Officer, Pitlam in A.S.No.5 of 1994 and this Court by judgment, dated 17.7.1998 dismissed the appeal confirming the fixation of the market value at Rs.12/- per sq.yd., however, deducted 1/4th instead of 1/5th towards developmental charges. His main submission is that in view of judgment of this Court in A.S.No.5 of 1994, the cross-objections filed by the claimant-respondent may be allowed and the compensation may be enhanced in terms of the judgment of this Court passed in A.S.No.5 of 1994. The only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the compensation awarded for the acquired land is on higher side and whether the claimant-respondent is entitled for enhancement of compensation as claimed? The facts are not in dispute. Admittedly, Ac.2.00 gts. of land belonged to the claimant was acquired for the purpose of providing house-sites. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 31.8.1982, and that the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3,000/- per acre. On reference being made, the reference Court relying on Ex.A.2-the certified copy of order passed in O.P.No.24 of 1990 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Bhodan, Nizamabad District fixed the compensation at Rs.5/- per sq.yd., but however deducted 1/5th out of the same towards developmental charges. From the impugned order, it is to be seen that in O.P.No.24 of 1990 the Subordinate Judge, Bhodan enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.12/- per sq.yd., and that the land covered by O.P.No.24 of 1990, situated in Pothareddipalli Village and the acquired land in this case are adjoining each other. R.W.1 himself admitted that the sivars (outskirts) of both the villages meet each other. This fact is, however, not disputed by the learned Government Pleader. In view of the same, we are of the view that the reference Court was justified in relying on the order, dated 24.9.1992 passed in O.P.No.24 of 1990 which is marked as Ex.A.2. Now, the learned counsel for the claimant-respondent has furnished a copy of order of this Court, dated 17.7.1998 in A.S.No.5 of 1994, wherein the enhancement of compensation made in O.P.No.24 of 1990 (Ex.A.2) was challenged and this Court while confirming the fixation of the market value at Rs.12/- per sq.yd. directed deduction of 1/4th instead of 1/5th of the area towards developmental charges. Therefore, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and cross-objections are liable to be allowed in terms of the judgment of this Court made in A.S.No.5 of 1994. We accordingly fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.12/- per sq.yd. and after giving 1/3rd deductions therefrom, the net market value of the acquired land comes to Rs.8/- per sq.yd., which works out to Rs.38,750/- per acre. Since the claimant- respondent restricted his claim to Rs.38,000/- per acre, we accordingly, fix the compensation of the acquired land at Rs.38,000/- per acre. The claimant-respondent is entitled to all statutory benefits under the Act 68 of 1984 as per the law declared by the Apex Court in Sunder v. Union of India[1]. It is needless to say that the amounts paid pursuant to the award and the enhancement made by the reference Court have to be adjusted under various heads as held by the Apex Court in Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India[2] for the purpose of calculating interest. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed and the cross- objections are allowed. No order as to costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J. OCTOBER 14, 2009 Tsr. [1] AIR 2001 SC 3516 [2] (2006) 8 SCC 457