THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR A.S.Nos.376, 347, and 654 of 1999 and cross-objections COMMON JUDGMENT (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) These three appeals by the Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Anantapur and cross-objections by the claimants arise out of the common order dt. 26-10-1998 passed in OP Nos.111, 112 and 113 of 1985 respectively. Hence they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. An extent of Ac.14-73 cents of land situate in Anantapur town was acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the backward classes by publishing the substance of the draft notice issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) in the Anantapur District Gazette dt. 22-5-1980 by invoking urgency clause under Sec. 17(4) of the Act dispensing with Sec. 5-A enquiry. The Land Acquisition Officer after complying the formalities and after obtaining sales statistics, three years preceding to the issuance of notice, passed an award being award No. 4/82 on 26-3-1982 fixing the market value at Rs.10050/- per acre with statutory benefits. The claimants on receipt of compensation under protest sought for a reference to the Civil Court for due determination of the compensation. On reference being made to the Civil Court, the claimants filed separate claim statement seeking compensation at Rs.2,000/- per cent. Later the claim statement was amended claiming compensation at Rs.3,000/- per cent as per orders passed in IA No.51/93 in OP No.111/85; IA.No.56/93 in OP.No.112/85; and IA No. 54/93 in OP No.113/1985 dated 21-6-1993 respectively. It is relevant to note here that the reference court clubbed OP Nos.111/85 and 112/1985 and recorded evidence. So also, the reference court recorded evidence in OP No.113/1985 separately. On behalf of the claimants in OP Nos.111/85 and 112/1985, the claimants therein themselves examined as P.W.1 and 3 apart from three more witnesses as P.Ws.2, 3 and 4, and marked Exs.A-1 to A-7 and Ex.X-1 on their behalf. On behalf of the referring officer, R.W.1 was examined but no document was marked. On behalf of the claimant in OP No.113/1985, claimant therein herself examined as P.W.1 apart from one more witness as P.W.2 and marked Exs. A-1 to A-8 on her behalf. No evidence, either oral or documentary, was adduced on behalf of the referring officer. Taking into consideration the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5 and Exs.A-1 to A-5 in OP Nos. 111 and 112 of 1985 and also admission made by R.W.1 concluded that the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.10050/- per acre is very low since the land acquired comes under residential-cum-commercial zone fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1 lakh per acre apart from statutory benefits. Questioning the enhancement made by the reference court, the Land Acquisition Officer filed three appeals and in which the claimants filed cross-objections confining the compensation at Rs.2,000/- per cent. In the appeals filed by the Land Acquisition Officer, it is contended that that since the award passed is prior to Acc.68/84 coming into force, the claimants are not entitled to additional benefits, and 1/3rd should be deducted for developmental charges and the reference court committed an error in marking Exs.A-2,A-4, A-5 and A-7 without any proof and therefore they cannot be taken into consideration. We have heard the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition Officer and Sri D.Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents-cross objectors, who have taken us through the evidence on record. Sri D.Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the cross-objectors contended that under Ex.A-1-award No.1/86 dt. 31-1-1986, land was acquired for the purpose of construction of houses by Andhra Pradesh Housing Board for the general public by issuing notification on 21-3-1980, which is two months prior to the notification covered by the present OPs, in which the Land Acquisition Officer himself awarded Rs.900/- per cent and on reference being made, the civil court enhanced the same to Rs.1,500/- per cent, which works out to Rs.1,50,000/- per acre, which is evidence from OP No.129/1987 dt. 28-3- 1991.Further under Ex.A-6 Xerox copy of agreement of sale dt. 21-7-1977 and later it was registered under Ex.A-6, 5 ½ cents of land was sold at Rs.2000/- per cent. In view of the same, the claimants are entitled to compensation at Rs.2,000/- per cent. Since the land is already in developed area and if 1/4th is deducted towards developmental activities, the claimants are entitled to Rs.1,50,000/- per acre. Per contra, learned Government Pleader has not disputed about the factum of acquiring Ac.95-13 cents of land adjoining to the acquired land for construction of houses by the A.P. Housing Board under notification dt.21-3-1980 and on reference being made the Civil Court enhanced the same to Rs.1500/- per cent under Ex.A-5 in OP No.129/1987. Learned GP fairly conceded that AS No.584/1993 preferred against the judgment passed in OP No.129/87 was dismissed by this court on 20-1-2000 confirming the market value of the acquired land for construction of houses by the Housing Board. From the evidence adduced by the parties, particularly, P.Ws.1 and 3 who are claimants in OP No.111/85 and 112/1985, it is clear that the acquired land is situated near to Housing Board Colony, Collector’s Office, Drivers’ colony, Office of Superintendent Engineer, Electricity and other offices. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award fixing the compensation at Rs.900/- per cent for the land acquired for construction of house by A.P. Housing Board and the same was enhanced by the Civil Court to Rs.1500/- per cent with all statutory benefits under the Act. It is in the evidence of P.W.1 that the acquired land is situated within the Anantapur Municipal limits and Collector’s Office is located at a distance of half a furlong from the acquired land and Bangalore-Anantapur Highway is at a distance of one furlong from the acquired land. Prior to the notification, one Jayarami Reddy sold an extent of Ac.0-03 cents under an agreement of sale for Rs.45,000/-, which works out to Rs.1,50,000/- per acre. P.W.2 who is the purchaser under Ex.A-6 deposed that himself, Anjinappa and Adilakshmma purchased Ac.0-14 ½ cents of land in S.No.289-3 situate at Anantapur from one Kesavareddy and another for Rs.24,000/- under an agreement of sale dt. 21-7-1977 covered under Ex.A-5. Later they obtained sale deed on 17-3-1981 covered under Ex.A-6 (registration copy of sale deed). He paid part of sale consideration of Rs.4000/- , and the land acquired by the Government is only 100 yards away from the land covered under Ex.A-6. R.W.1 who is working as Senior Assistant in Revenue Divisional Office, Anantapur admitted in his cross-examination that abutting to the land acquired, there is a Housing Board Colony and the 4(1) notification to acquire the land for Housing Board Colony was issued on 21-3-1980 and the market value was fixed at Rs.900/- per cent by the Land Acquisition Officer. He also admitted that the acquired land is nearer to Divers’ colony and the acquired land is situated at a distance of 2 KMs from the Collector’s Office. From the evidence adduced by the parties, it is clear that an extent of Ac.95-13 cents land, adjoining to the acquired land, was acquired by the Government on 21-3-1980. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at Rs.900/- per cent. On reference, the Civil Court enhanced the same to Rs.1500/- per cent and the same has become final on dismissal of AS No.584/1993 filed by the Land Acquisition Officer. The present land, admeasuring Ac.14-73 cents adjoining to the Housing Board Colony, was acquired on 22-5- 1980. Therefore, the claimants have discharged the initial burden that the land value is Rs.1500/- per cent by the date when the notification was issued, and it is for the Land Acquisition Officer to rebut the said evidence. Though R.W.1 admitted about awarding of compensation at Rs.900/- per cent for the land acquired for construction of houses by A.P. Housing Board, we cannot understand why Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.10,050/- per acre, for the lands acquired just two months after the issuance of notification. In OP No.129/1987 the Civil Court after taking into consideration Exs.A-2 and Ex.A-3 therein, (equivalent to Ex.A-6 and A-7 in OP Nos.111 and 112 of 1985 and Exs.A-5 and A-6 in OP No.113/1985) fixed the market value at Rs.1,500/- per cent. It is well settled for due determination of the market value, the compensation fixed for the land acquired within the proximity of the notification is a relevant piece of evidence for determining the market value. Once the award for the lands acquired within the proximity of notification becomes final, the same can form basis for fixation of market value for the land acquired nearer to that. Since the award fixing the market value for the land acquired to an extent of Ac.95-13 cents covered under OP No.129/1987,has attained finality, we fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.1,50,000/- per acre, as awarded in the said OP Since the award is passed prior to Act.68/1984 coming into force, the claimants are not entitled to additional market value but are entitled to higher rate of solatium at 30% and interest at 9% per annum from the date of taking possession and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of payment including solatium. Accordingly, we fix the market value for the acquired land at Rs.1,50,000/- per acre, and the claimant are entitled to solatium at 30% on the market value and interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation including solatium for a period of one year from the date of notification ie., 22-5-1980 but not from the date of taking possession ie.,26-3-1980 and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realization. In the result, the appeals filed by the State are allowed partly setting aside to the extent of granting additional market value at 12% and interest from the date of taking possession and the cross-objections by the claimants are allowed to the extent indicated above. The parties shall bear their own costs. __________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J ______________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR,J Date: 5-8-2009 kmr