IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO L.A.A.S. NO. 31 OF 2007 Between: The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Rep. by the General Manager, Ramagundam Area IV ..... Appellant AND Ullendula Rajaiah and others .....Respondents The Court made the following: JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) This appeal is preferred by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘Act’) questioning the order and decree dated 27.06.2006 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Manthani, Karimnagar District in O.P. No.4 of 2004, arising out of Sec.18 of the Act. The appellant company has requisitioned for the acquisition of patta lands to an extent of Ac.29.29 in Sy. Nos. 91,93, 94, 100 to 110 situated at Mulkalapali village of Kamanpur Mandal, for the purpose of construction of staff quarters of its employees. Accordingly, a draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 28.7.1989 and the draft declaration was published on 29.7.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer, on the basis of the sale statistics collected during the course of award enquiry, fixed the market value of the land under acquisition at Rs.8,500/- per acre apart from granting compensation to the tune of Rs.1,54,803/- for the tappable and untappable sendhi trees and passed the Award Ex. B-1. Dissatisfied with such determination of the market value, the respondents herein sought reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per acre. Accordingly, the matter was referred to the Civil Court under Sec.18 of the Act. On behalf of the respondents – claimants before the Reference Court, the claimant Nos. 63 and 2 were examined as PWs.1 and 2 respectively and the vendors under Exs. A-1 to A-3 were examined as PWs 3 to 5 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-3 sale deeds. On behalf of the Appellant Company, the Special Deputy Tahsildar was examined as RW-1, the Estate Manager of the appellant company was examined as RW-2 and the Deputy General Manager (Survey) was examined as RW-3. Ex.B1 are the Award proceedings, Ex.B-2 is the copy of sale deed relied on by the appellant herein and Ex.B-3 is the village plan. On a consideration of the evidence available on record, the Reference Court enhanced the market value of the acquired land at Rs.25,000/- per acre from Rs.8,500/-. It also enhanced the compensation in respect of the sendhi trees one time over and above the compensation granted by the Land Acquisition Officer, apart from granting other statutory benefits under the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited. Heard Mr. N.Subba Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant Company and Mr. V.V. Ramana Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents – claimants. It is vehemently contended by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant company that there is no basis for the Reference Court to enhance the market value of the acquired land threefold to Rs.25,000/- per acre. He also contends that the Reference Court has not given any reason muchless cogent and convincing reason for coming to the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land is Rs.25,000/- per acre, more particularly when the sale deeds relied upon by the parties do not reflect that they are comparable sales or of the same village. Per contra, it is the contention of learned counsel for the respondents – claimants that the acquired land has the same potentiality as that of the land under Ex.A-3 and that it is one year prior to the date of notification in the instant case. He also contends that the trial court ought to have given allowance over and above the rate mentioned in Ex.A-3 for the time lag between the date of notification and the date of sale under Ex.A-3. As can be seen from the evidence on record, the Exs. A-1 to A-3 and B-2 cannot be treated as comparable sales and hence, cannot be relied upon to determine just and reasonable market value. Hence, the Reference Court has rightly eschewed the same from consideration. During the course of arguments, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant Company has brought to the notice of this court that in respect of similarly situated lands, which is subject matter of LAAS No. 585 of 2007, after taking into consideration various factors, this court has reduced the compensation from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.20,000/- and submits that Rs.20,000/- is just and reasonable market value in respect of the acquired lands, to which, learned counsel for the respondents – claimants has agreed. Therefore, in view of this submission, we are of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met by granting Rs.20,000/- per acre for the lands under acquisition, as was awarded by a Bench of this court in LAAS No. 585 of 2007 dated 18.4.2008. Accordingly, the market value of the acquired land granted by the Reference Court is reduced from Rs.25,000/- and determined at Rs.20,000/- per acre. The compensation determined by the reference court in all other aspects is confirmed. It is needless to mention that the claimants are entitled to the statutory benefits under the Act. With this modification in the order impugned, the appeal stands partly allowed. No order as to costs. _________________ Justice N.V. Ramana __________________ Justice K.S. Appa Rao June 13, 2011 MAS.