HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR A.S. No.989 OF 2004 DATED:14-09-2009 BETWEEN: The Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer), Nizamabad District. …Appellant AND K.Gangadhar …Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR A.S. No.989 OF 2004 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act is preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer challenging the order of the Additional District Judge, Nizamabad passed in O.P.No.794 of 1999, dated 18.07.2003, whereby and whereunder the reference Court enhanced the market value of the acquired land from Rs.40,000/- to Rs.1,74,240/- per acre. We have heard the learned Government Pleader for appeals and Sri V.Ravi Kiran Rao, learned counsel appearing for the claimant, who have taken us through the evidence adduced by the parties. An extent of Ac.1.20 gts. of land belonging to the claimant- respondent situated in Srinagar Village, hamlet of Gundaram Village was acquired by Government for the purpose of construction of houses by publishing draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘Act’) on 28.6.1998. The Land Acquisition Officer after obtaining the sale statistics of 72 sale deeds and after conducting enquiry, passed an award fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.40,000/- per acre with all statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the fixation of the market value, the claimant sought for reference to the Civil Court and on reference being made, he appeared before the reference Court and claimed compensation at Rs.200/- per sq.yd. In order to prove the prevailing market value as on the date of draft notification, the claimant apart from himself examining as P.W.1, examined two more witnesses as P.Ws.2 and 3 and got marked Ex.A.1 sale deed. On behalf of reference officer, R.W.1 was examined and the award copy was marked as Ex.B.1. After taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and Ex.A.1 sale deed, dated 4.8.1997 under which, the land to an extent of 165 sq.yds. situated in Gundaram village was sold for a consideration of Rs.9100/- which works out to Rs.55/- per sq.yd., the reference Court by deducting 1/3rd therefrom towards developmental charges, arrived at the market value of the acquired land at Rs.36 per sq.yd. Learned Government Pleader strenuously contended that the sale deed-Ex.A.1 on which the reference Court placed reliance, is about 10 months earlier to the date of notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, and that the land covered by Ex.A.1 is situated in Gundaram village and whereas the acquired land is situated in Srinagar Village and therefore, the transaction covered by Ex.A.1 cannot form the basis for fixation of the market value of the acquired land. We do not see any merit in the submission of the learned Government Pleader for the simple reason that the Land Acquisition Officer in the process of award-enquiry gathered 72 sale deeds under which, the land sold was situated in Gundaram Village only, to which Srinagar Village is a hamlet. The Land Acquisition Officer discarded all the highest sale transactions among 72 sale deeds and after taking the sale transaction at serial No.30 into consideration, where the land to an extent of Ac.3.19 ½ gts. in Sy.Nos.326, 327 and 328 was sold at Rs.35,015/- per acre on 3.10.1996 and after giving due escalation for the time gap, fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.40,000/- per acre. Further Ex.A.1-sale deed was also appeared at serial No.62 in the award but however, the Land Acquisition Officer discarded the same on the ground that only small extent of 165 sq.yds. of land was sold therein for construction of houses. P.W.3 in his chief- examination categorically stated that one Arif Khan sold the plot admeasuring 160 sq.yds. situated in Gundaram Village to one Smt.Khairunnisa Begum on 4.8.1997 for a consideration of Rs.9100/- under Ex.A.1. He further deposed that Srinagar village is at a distance of 1 ½ k.ms. from Gundaram village, and that Srinagar village is abutting to 80 feet road, and that Gundaram village is inside from the road, and that the lands of Srinagar village are more costlier than the lands of Gundaram village. The evidence of claimant as P.W.1 also discloses that the acquired land is abutting the village and 80 feet thar road, and that by the side of acquired land, there are industries such as rice mill, granite factories and also residential houses, and that in the village, there is a school and bus facility. The 80 feet road abutting the acquired land leads to Nandipet and Navipet Mandal head quarters and Nizamabad, and whereas, Gundaram village is 1 ½ k.ms. inside from the main road and therefore, the lands of Srinagar village have more potentiality compared with the lands of Gundaram village due to its proximity to the 80 feet road. Though the Land Acquisition Officer adopted the sale deed appeared at serial No.30 as comparable sale for fixation of the market value of the acquired land, the same was neither marked nor any person connected thereto was examined to prove that the land covered by that sale deed is similar to the acquired land. It is well settled that the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer and the contents therein cannot be treated as evidence unless the sale deeds reflected in the award are filed and marked as evidence. On the other hand, the claimant by examining P.W.3 proved Ex.A.1 sale transaction as a genuine sale transaction, and that in the cross-examination of P.W.1 nothing was elicited to discard his testimony that near to the acquired land 80 feet road passes through, and that adjacent to the acquired land there is a granite factory, rice mill etc., which shows that the acquired land has all the potentiality to be sold as house-site. The fact that the acquisition itself is for the purpose of providing house-sites also proves the potentiality of the acquired land to be used for residential purpose. In view of the above, the fixation of the market value of the acquired land by the reference Court at Rs.36/- per sq.yd. after giving deductions of 1/3r d towards developmental charges from Rs.55/- per sq.yd. basing on Ex.A.1 as comparable sale, reflects the true market value of the acquired land. We do not see any merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J. SEPTEMBER 14, 2009 Tsr.