IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 06.04.2010 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.BANUMATHI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL A.S.Nos. 386 & 387 of 2000 and CMP.No.1710/2010 in A.S.No.386/2000 & CMP.No.1711/2010 in A.S.No.387/2000 and Cross Objection Nos.94/2002 and 54/2003 in A.S.No.386/2000 A.S.Nos.386 & 387 of 2000: 1. The Land Acquisition Officer and the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Bye-pass Road, Namakkal. 2. The Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Salem-5. 3. National Highways Authority of India, Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways, rep. by its Project Director and General Manager. ... Appellants in both Appeals. (Referring Officer) [3rd Appellant impleaded as per order of the Court dated 16.12.05 made in CMP Nos.18404, 18405 and 18448/2005] vs. M.Mahalingam ... Respondent/Claimant in A.S.No.386/2000 M.Mahalingam V.Mayilvaganam ... Respondents/Claimants in A.S.No.387/2000 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Cross Objection No.94 of 2002: M.Mahalingam ... Cross Objector./ Respondent in AS vs. 1. The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Bye-pass Road, Namakkal. 2. The Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Salem-5. ... Respondents/ Appellants in AS Cross Objection No.54 of 2003: M.Mahalingam V.Mayilvaganam ... Cross Objectors./ Respondents in AS vs. 1. The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Bye-pass Road, Namakkal. 2. The Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Salem-5. ... Respondents./ Appellants in AS CMP.No.1710/2010 in A.S.No.386/2000 & CMP.No.1711/2010 in A.S.No.387/2000: National Highways Authority of India, rep. by its Project Director Ministry of Road Transport & Highways No.10, Kamadhenu Nagar, Karur. ... Petitioner/3rd Appellant. vs. 1. The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Bye-pass Road, Namakkal. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Salem-5. 3. M.Mahalingam 4. V.Mayilvaganam. ... Respondents./ appellants 1 &2 and Respondents Prayer: Appeals filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act against the Common Judgment made in LAOP.Nos.7 and 8/1996 dated 28.04.1999 on the file of Subordinate Judge, Namakkal. Prayer: Cross Objections filed under Order 41, Rule 22 CPC to set aside the disallowed portion of decree and judgment in L.A.O.P.Nos.7 and 8 of 1996 dated 28.04.2000 on the file of Sub-Court, Namakkal. Prayer: Petitions filed under Or.41, Rule 27 CPC praying to receive the documents filed along with the Petitions. For Appellants 1 & 2 : Mr.V.Ravi both the appeals Special G.P. [AS] For 3rd Appellant in : Mr.M.Ravindran, both the appeals Addl. Solicitor General assisted by M/s.P.Wilson Associates For Respondents/ : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram Claimants Senior Counsel for M/s.Gladys Daniel COMMON JUDGMENT R.BANUMATHI,J Feeling aggrieved by the enhancement of compensation from 0.79 Paise to Rs.75/- per sq. ft. in respect of the lands acquired in Vallipuram village, Namakkal Taluk for formation of bye-pass road to Namakkal town, the Special Tahsildar and National Highways Authorities of India have filed these Appeals. Since, both the appeals and cross-objections arise out of common order and the points for consideration are one and same, both the Appeals were taken up together and disposed of by this Common Judgment. 2. Large extent of lands were acquired for formation of bye-pass road to Namakkal town having length of about 8 Kilometers. An extent of 11.47.0 Hectares of lands in Vallipuram village in various sub- divisions comprised in S.F.Nos.123, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 131, 135, 136, 233, 235 237, 244, 245, 251, 253, 254 and 255 were acquired. Sec.4(1) notification was approved in G.O.No.1242 P.W. (Highways) H.P.1 dated 24.8.1993 and published in Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 22.9.1993. Sec.4(1) notification was also https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ published in Tamil newspapers viz., "Makkal Kural" and "Kumari Murasu" on 23.9.1993 and the substance of the above notification was also published in the village on 25.10.1993. Sec.5-A enquiry was conducted on 15.04.1994. Sec.6 notification was published in the Government Gazette on 20.07.1994 and in the newspapers on 21.07.1994 and substance of the said notification under Sec.6 was also published in the locality on 08.08.1994. 3. To determine the market value of the lands under acquisition, sales statistics for the period of three years from 25.10.1990 to 24.10.1993 have been gathered. Totally 95 sales had taken place during the said period. Land Acquisition Officer [LAO] has examined those sale deeds for fixing the market value for the lands under acquisition. Except the lands covered in Sl.No.16 in the sales statistics, the other sales were discarded on the ground that they are far away from the lands under acquisition or that the rates do not reflect the prevailing rate of lands under acquisition. Under sale deed [Sl.No.16] dated 08.06.1991 [Document No.829] an extent of 1.27.5 Hectares (or) 3.15 acres comprised in Dry S.Nos.277/3A1, 3B, 5A and 5B of Vallipuram village has been sold for Rs.75,000/- i.e. per Hectare Rs.58,823/- i.e., Rs.23,814/- per acre. LAO was of the view that land in S.Nos.277/3A1, 3B, 5A and 5B is identical to the Manavari Dry lands under acquisition. Hence, the above sale which took place in S.Nos.277/3A1, 3B, 5A and 5B has been taken as basis for fixing the market value for the Manavari Dry lands under acquisition and fixed the value at Rs.58,823/- per hectare for Manavari Dry lands. 4. In so far as irrigated Dry lands, an extent of 1.21.5 Hectares (or) 3.01½ acres comprised in S.No.254/3, 6, 8A of Vallipuram village has been sold for Rs.75,000/- under Document No.949 dated 28.06.1991 which means Rs.61,475/- per Hectare (or) Rs.24,888/- per acre. LAO was of the view that land in S.F.Nos.254/3, 6, 8A and the Dry lands under acquisition are identical in all respects and therefore, the above sale which took place on 28.6.1991 [Document No.949] has been taken for fixing the market value for the irrigated Dry lands under acquisition and fixed the value at Rs.61,475/- per hectare. Fixing the above value for Manavari and irrigated Dry lands, Award No.3/1995 was passed ordering 30% solatium, 12% additional market value from 25.10.1983 to 05.10.1995. LAO has also fixed appropriate value for the trees in the acquired lands. 5. On objection raised by the land owners, reference under Sec.18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made. References were taken on file as LAOP.Nos.7 and 8/1996. In the Reference Court, both the LAOPs were taken up together and disposed by common order on 28.04.1999. Before the Reference Court, the Special Tahsildar [Land Acquisition] and the Divisional Engineer, National Highways, Salem https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ alone were Respondents. The Requisitioning Body/Beneficiary for which the lands were acquired viz., National Highways Authorities of India [NHAI] was not made as a party. 6. In the Reference Court, Claimant Mahalingam-Power Agent [Claimant in LAOP.No.7/1996 and 1st Claimant in LAOP.No.8/1996] was examined as CW1 and purchasers of adjacent land were examined as CWs.2 to 8 respectively. On the side of Claimant, Exs.C1 to C24 were marked. One Chandrasekaran, the Special Tahsildar [LAO] was examined as RW1. Exs.R1 to R3 were marked. 7. Reference Court has taken Ex.C3-sale deed [Document No.1369 dated 25.8.1993] in which 600 sq. ft. comprised in S.F.Nos.251/2A2, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 was sold for Rs.45,000/- by Ramachandran, Power of Attorney of one Doss infavour of one Marimuthu and fixed the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. Reference Court has also referred to Ex.C2- sale deed [19.1.1993] in which an extent of 500 sq. ft. in S.F.Nos.251/2A1, 2B1, 2A2, 2B2 was sold for Rs.50,000/-/. After taking Ex.C3-sale deed for fixing the market value, Reference Court ordered (i) enhancement of compensation from 0.79 Paise to Rs.75/- per sq. ft.; (ii) 30% solatium on the enhanced market value; (iii) 12% additional market value from 25.10.1993 to 05.10.1995; (iv) interest at the rate of 9% for one year from the date of taking possession; and (v) thereafter interest at the rate of 15% p.a. till the date of realisation. 8. Challenging the enhancement of compensation, the LAO/Special Tahsildar[LA] and the Divisional Engineer, National Highways [not National Highways Authorities of India] have preferred these Appeals. In the Appeals, on Petition filed by the National Highways Authorities of India – Requisitioning body, National Highways Authorities of India was impleaded as 3rd Appellant. 9. Main contention of learned Additional Solicitor General is that to determine just and proper compensation the Beneficiary – National Highways Authorities of India ought to have been made as a party. It was further submitted that though the Divisional Engineer, National Highways was one of the Respondent in the LAOPs, there was no representation for National Highways Authorities of India. Main plank of argument of the Appellants is that without proper and effective representation of NHAI, the compensation amount was enhanced prejudicially affecting the interest of National Highways Authorities of India/Union of India which has to bear the heavy compensation. 10. Drawing our attention to the additional documents filed in the C.M.Ps., Mr.M.Ravindran, learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that even from 1991, there were protests and demonstrations in and around Namakkal for forming bye-pass road to Namakkal town and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ that after knowing about the scheme for formation of bye-pass road, land owners have brought into existence the sale deeds boosting the land value and the considerations stated in Exs.C3 and C2-sale deeds are fancy value to make a boosted claim for compensation. Taking us through the sales statistics and also the sale deeds infavour of Ashok Leyland Company, learned Additional Solicitor General has submitted that there was only slow increase in price of the lands and the sudden spurt in the value of the land was boosted as it was after the grant of administrative sanction for formation of bye-pass road to Namakkal town. 11. Learned Additional Solicitor General further argued that if the additional documents are received in evidence, it would be evident that Exs.C3 and C2-sale deeds were brought into existence boosting the value by Mahalingam and Mayilvaganan. It was further argued that when large extent of land is acquired, there cannot be determination of market value on square feet basis and the enhancement of compensation at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. is not supported by any objective assessment. It was also urged that for formation of highways, National Highways Authorities of India has spent huge amount for laying road and developing it and while so, Reference Court erred in not making any deduction for development charges. 12. We have also heard Mr.V.Ravi, learned Special Government Pleader [AS] appearing for the Appellants 1 and 2 submitted that LAO has taken the relevant sale deed which is prior to Sec.4(1) notification and has rightly fixed the market value at 0.79 Paise per sq. ft. and while so, Court below erred in relying upon Ex.C3-sale deed without any basis. Learned Special Government Pleader placed reliance upon (1997) 9 SCC 330 [P.Rajan and another v. Kerala State Electricity Board and another] and AIR 1995 SC 1004 [M/s.Neyveli Lignite Corpn. Ltd., v. Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition], Neyveli and others]. Placing reliance upon (1996) 6 SCC 41 [Special Deputy Collector and another v. Kurra Sambasiva Rao and others], the learned Special Government Pleader contended that it is the bounden duty of the Court to determine the market value on an objective assessment of the conditions prevailing in the open market and the value fixed by the Reference Court is exorbitant. 13. Laying emphasis upon Ex.C3-sale deed, Ms. Nalini Chidambaram, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Claimants contended that under Exs.C3-sale deed, the land was sold at the rate of Rs.75/- per sq. ft. and Reference Court has rightly taken the market value at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. and even in January 1993, it was sold for Rs.100/- per sq. ft. It was further argued that merely because some persons were agitating for forming bye-pass road, it cannot be the ground to hold that the value was boosted in Ex.C3 and C2-sale deeds. It was contended that Ex.C3-sale deed is said to have been preceded by an agreement - Ex.C12 dated 22.12.1992 under which https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Plot No.83 comprised in S.F.Nos.251.2A2, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 measuring an extent of 600 sq. ft. was agreed to be sold for Rs.45,500/-. Stand of Respondents-Claimants is that Ex.C3-sale deed was preceded by an agreement which lends assurance to Ex.C3-sale deed. Learned Senior Counsel further argued that the potential value of the land has to be kept in view and no rebuttal evidence was adduced by the Appellants and the acquired lands are in the midst of developed area and the value prior to Sec.4(1) notification was rightly taken into consideration by the Reference Court. Learned Senior Counsel would submit that the lands situated nearby the acquired lands were already purchased by Ashok Leyland Company and therefore, the market value fixed by the Reference Court cannot be said to be exorbitant or on the higher side. 14. We have carefully examined the submissions of learned Additional Solicitor General and learned Special Government Pleader and also learned Senior Counsel for Claimants. 15. Lands measuring 11.47.0 Hectares in Vallipuram village in various sub-divisions comprised in S.F.Nos.123, 124, 125, 127, 128, 129, 131, 135, 136, 233, 235 237, 244, 245, 251, 253, 254 and 255 have been acquired for formation of bye-pass road to Namakkal town. Vallipuram is a ryotwari village. To determine the market value of the lands under acquisition, sale statistics for the period of three years from 25.10.1990 to 24.10.1993 were gathered and there were totally 95 sales during the said period in the village. Upon careful analysis of the said sales, it is seen that under Sl.No.5 – sale deed dated 12.03.1991 an extent of 1258 sq. ft. comprised in S.F.No.251/2A1 and 2B1 was sold by Mahalingam and others to one Viswanath for Rs.1000/- i.e. 0.79 Paise per sq. ft. Analysis of various sale deeds contained in the sales statistics would show that there was only slow increase in the value of the lands as is seen from the following:- Sl .N o Doc. No. and Date S.F.No. Exten t sold Name of Vendor Name of Vendee Sold at Rs. Rate per Hectare Rs. 5 369 12.03.1991 251/2A1, 2B1 1258 sq. ft. Mahalingam and others Viswanath 1000/- 0.79 Paise 6 371 12.03.1991 251/2A1, 2B2 3500 sq.ft. Kaliammal and others Jeganathan 12,000/- 3.43 8 625 25.04.191 251/2A1, 2B1, 2B2 3000 sq.ft. Mayilvaganam and others Kambalatha n Chettiar 10,000/- 3.33 10 677 03.05.1991 251/2A1, 2B1 1600 sq.ft. Mahalingam and others Aushgar Basha 5600/- 3.50 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl .N o Doc. No. and Date S.F.No. Exten t sold Name of Vendor Name of Vendee Sold at Rs. Rate per Hectare Rs. 11 713 08.05.1991 251/2A1, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 1500 sq.ft. Mayilvaganam and others Raju 5000/- 3.33 19 883 14.06.1991 251/2A1, 2B1 1500 sq.ft. Mahalingam Saravanan 6000/- 4.00 32 1005 12.07.1991 251/2A2, 2B1, 2B2, 2A2 1475 sq.ft. Mahalingam Gnanasekar an 15,000/- 10.16 36 1205 05.09.1991 251/2A2, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 1500 sq.ft. Mayilvaganam Subramania n 15,000/- 10.00 48 1507 30.10.1991 251/2A1, 2B1, 2A2, 2B2 412½ sq.ft. Mahalingam and others Saravanan 6,200/- 15.05 65 898 15.06.1992 251/2A2, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 1500 sq.ft. Mayilvaganam and others Kumarasamy 22,500/- 15.00 71 1554 21.10.1992 251/2A2, 2B2 1500 sq.ft. Mayilvaganam Kanagaraj 30,000/- 20.00 By analysis of the above sales, it is clear that there was only very slow increase in the value of the lands. Most of the sale transactions pertaining to house sites were sold only by Claimants- Mahalingam and Mayilvaganan and rest of the transactions were predominantly of agricultural lands. 16. Serial No.76 [Ex.C2] of sales statistics is the sale deed dated 19.1.1993 in which an extent of 500 sq. ft. comprised in S.F.No.251/2A1, 2B1, 2A2, 2B2 was sold by Saravanan and others to one Jawahar for Rs.50,000/- i.e. Rs.100/- per sq. ft. Like wise, Serial No.93 [Ex.C3] is the sale deed dated 25.8.1993 in which an extent of 600 sq. ft. was sold by Ramachandran infavour of Marimuthu for Rs.45,000/- i.e. Rs.75/- per sq. ft. Leaving all the documents for a period of three years where the land value was lesser ranging from Rs.3/- to Rs.20/-, curiously the Reference Court has taken Ex.C3-sale deed as basis for fixing the market value. For taking Ex.C3-sale deed, Reference Court has observed that Ex.C3 is prior to Sec.4(1) notification and therefore, Ex.C3-sale deed is taken as basis for fixing the market value. The value fixed by the Reference Court is not based on any objective assessment. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 17. Under Ex.C6 (24.04.1991), Mahalingam has obtained Power of Attorney from one Kaliammal and others. Like wise, under Ex.C7 (30.1.1991), Mayilvaganan has obtained Power of Attorney from one Parvathi and others. As pointed out earlier, by analysis of sales statistics, Claimants-Mahalingam and Mayilvaganan who got power from land owners were selling small extent of house sites and most of the sale transactions in the sales statistics are sale deeds executed by Claimants-Mahalingam and Mayilvaganan. In Serial No.29 – sale deed dated 01.07.1991, an extent of 600 sq. ft. comprised in S.No.251/2A2, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 was sold by Mayilvaganam infavour of Doss for Rs.6000/- i.e. Rs.100/- per sq. ft. Under Ex.C3 [sale deed dated 25.8.1993], Power Agent of the said Doss viz., Ramachandran had sold an extent of 600 sq. ft. in S.F.No.251/2A2, 2B2, 2A1, 2B1 to one Marimuthu for Rs.45,000/- i.e. Rs.75/- per sq. ft. 18. For quite some time, from May 1991 there was a demand for bye-pass road to Namakkal town. From one of the pamphlets filed by National Highways Authorities of India as additional documents, it is seen that from 1991, there were protest and demonstrations in and around Namakkal for forming bye-pass road to Namakkal town. Additional documents are also produced in Petitions filed under Or.41, Rule 27 CPC to show that administrative sanction [C.No.45/93/JDO dated 09.01.1993] was granted for the estimate of Rs.83.11 lakhs for formation of Namakkal bye-pass road. When the above Proceedings of administrative sanction was issued in January 1993 giving details of extent of lands to be acquired in various villages, by the said Proceedings dated 09.01.1993 the project has taken final shape. In such circumstances under Serial No.76, a small extent of 500 sq. ft. in S.F.Nos.251/2A1, 2B1, 2A2, 2B2 was sold by one Saravanan and others infavour of Jawahar under Ex.C2 sale deed dated 19.1.1993 for Rs.50,000/- i.e. Rs.100/- per sq. ft. As rightly contended by Mr.M.Ravindran, learned Additional Solicitor General, serious doubts arise as to genuineness of the transaction of Exs.C3 and C2-sale deeds. Reference Court appears to have fixed the value unmindful of fact that there was long standing agitation to form bye-pass road from 1991. 19. Laying emphasis upon the sale deeds infavour of Ashok Leyland Company, the learned Senior Counsel for Claimants contended that Ashok Leyland Company and TVS Group have purchased the property in S.F.Nos.276, 277 and 278, the value of the lands nearby the acquired lands has gone up and Reference Court has rightly fixed the value of the land at Rs.75/- per sq. ft. 20. There is no force in the contention that the value of the land had substantially gone up after Ashok Leyland Company had purchased the property. In the sales statistics, Serial Nos.80 to 86 are the sale deeds dated 29.03.1993 under which an extent of land ranging from 4.40 acres to 2.61 acres was sold by Namakkal Auto https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Nagar Association to Ashok leyland Company and as per the said sale deeds, rate per Hectare is Rs.1,11,000/-. The details of lands sold to Ashok Leyland Company are as under:- Sl. No Doc. No. and Date S.No. Exten t sold in acres Name of Vendor Name of Vendee Sold at Rs. Rate per Hectare Rs. 80 544 29.03.1993 274/7, 3, 2C, 9 275/1, 2 276/13B 4.40 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,97,838/- 1,10,000/- 81 545 29.03.1993 276/11, 12A 277/13B 4.35 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,95,624/- [After enquiry value was fixed at 2,36,260/- 1,11,000/- 82 546 29.03.1993 276/2B, 13A 277/3B 3.63 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,63,391/- 1,11,000/- 83 547 29.03.1993 277/1, 2, 5A & 5B 3.51 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,57,829/- 1,11,000/- 84 548 29.03.1993 278/2 293/2 3.98 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,78,947/- 1,11,000/- 85 549 29.03.1993 278/3 2.61 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,17,261/- 1,11,000/- 86 550 29.03.1993 278/3 2.62 Namakkal Auto Nagar Associat ion Ashok Leyland Company 1,17,819/- 1,11,000/- 21. The sale deed [Document No.545 dated 29.03.1993] presented for registration by Ashok Leyland Company was not registered on the ground that it was undervalued. After enquiry, the land value was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ fixed at Rs.2,36,260/- i.e. Rs.1.25 per sq. ft. and deficit stamp of Rs.4149/- and registration fee of Rs.345/- were collected from Ashok Leyland Company. So even after enquiry for under valuation, the value fixed was only Rs.1.25 per sq. ft. and not a higher value as contended by the Claimants. 22. By analysis of the sale deeds infavour of Ashok Leyland Company, three things are emerge:- ●Large extent of lands were sold on the basis of value per Acre. ●Per Hectare value is Rs.1,11,000/- that means Rs.44,939/- rounded to Rs.44,940/- per acre which means more or less Rs.1.03 per sq. ft. ●Even after enquiry, the value was fixed at Rs.2,36,260/- i.e. Rs.1.25 per sq. ft. If we examine Exs.C3 and C2-sale deeds where the consideration is stated as Rs.75/- and Rs.100/- respectively per sq. ft. vis-a-vis purchases by Ashok Leyland Company, without any fear of contradiction, it can be concluded that Exs.C3 and C2 are nothing but boosted value. 23. Our view is fortified by another sale deed where the land was sold for industrial purpose. If we take Serial No.78 – sale deed dated 05.03.1993, an extent of 0.38½ cent in S.F.No.303/2 was sold by one Muthusami to Nallusami for industrial purpose for Rs.20,000/- which means per Hectare Rs.1,29,000/- i.e. Rs.52,226/- per acre [Rs.1.19 rounded to Rs.1.20 per sq. ft.]. 24. Ex.C11 [26.02.1993] is an agreement by Mayilvaganan and others agreeing to sell 0.75.0 Hectares in S.F.Nos.251/2A1, 2A2, 2B1, 2B2 at the rate of Rs.200/- per sq. ft. Claimants have produced number of agreements of sale – Exs.C8 to C11 (23.2.1993 and 26.2.1993) by Mayilvaganan and Mahalingam who got Power of Attorney agreeing to sell the properties at the value of Rs.200/- per sq. ft. Placing reliance upon 1996 LACC 232 [Puvvada Nageswara Rao and others v. The Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Ongole], it was contended that reliance can be placed on the agreements to sell and the Reference Court ought to have fixed the value at Rs.200/- per sq. ft. In the said decision, the Division Bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court held that reliance can be placed upon the agreements to sell if they are found to be not merely for claiming higher compensation. In the said case before the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the agreements were registered much prior to issuance of notification and not merely for claiming higher compensation. In the instant case, Ex.C11 is an unregistered agreement by Mayilvaganan and others. National Highways Authorities of India had no chance to meet the agreement [Ex.C11] to bring home the point whether Ex.C11 could be relied upon or not. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 25. Under Sec.23(1) of the Act, the Court has to determine the market value of the land. One of the methods of valuation is the price paid, within a reasonable time, in bonafide transactions of purchase of land acquired, or of the land adjacent to the land acquired having similar advantages. Such transactions of sale indicate the price of the land acquired on the date of the notification. The Court has to consider whether or not any particular transaction of sale affords a fair criterion of the market value of the land acquired. 26. By perusal of documents now filed as additional documents, there had been protests and demonstrations even from 1991 for forming bye-pass road to Namakkal town. Administrative sanction was granted vide Proceedings C.No.45/93/JDO dated 09.01.1993 . Exs.C3 and C2- sale deeds are after the administrative sanction. All the agreements Exs.C8 to C11 were entered in February 1993. Exaggeration of value is evident from the fact that from January to February 1993, the value shoot up by double the time i.e. Rs.100/- to Rs.200/- per sq. ft. Reference Court was swayed by Exs.C3 and C2-sale deeds and does not appear to have carefully examined Exs.C3 and C2-sale deeds which are not compatible with