THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO L.A.A.S. No.999 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) The Land Acquisition Officer-Special Deputy Collector, L.A. Unit, P.J. Project, Gadwal, filed this appeal challenging the order, dated 06.09.2007, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gadwal, in O.P.No.29 of 2005. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The Government of A.P. acquired lands in S.Nos.576/2/3 and 575/2, the total extent of which is Ac.1.30 guntas, belonging to the claimants situate at Kondair village, by publication of notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act, dated 23.5.2002 for the purpose of excavation of right main canal from 0.00 K.M. to 0.900 of D/33 of PJP. The possession of the acquired land was taken on 14.9.1995 i.e., seven years prior to the notification. The Land Acquisition Officer passed the award on 30.12.2003 fixing the market value of the lands at the rate of Rs.28,000/- per acre. Being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the claimants sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act. On reference being made, the claimants appeared before the Court below and filed claim statement claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- in addition to the other benefits. Before the Court below, P.Ws. 1 to 5 were examined and Exs.A1 to A5 were marked on behalf of the claimants. On behalf of the Referring Officer, R.W.1 was examined and Exs.B1 document was marked. The Court below while placing reliance on Exs.A2 and A3- transactions that took place within three prior to the notification in the present case, answered the reference as follows: (i) The market value is fixed at Rs.80,000/- per acre for all the lands under acquisition; (ii) In addition to the market value a sum calculated at 12% p.a., is awarded on the market value from the date of Section 4(1) notification i.e., 23.5.2002 till the date of award; (iii) Solatium of 30% on the market value of the acquired lands is awarded; (iv) Interest on market value, solatium and additional market value at the rate of 9% p.a., from 23.5.2002 for a period of one year and 15% p.a., thereafter till payment as per the ruling of the larger Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sunder V. Union of India (2001(7) SCC 211) (v) The claimants are entitled to the costs. Advocate’s fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/-. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred by the Government. Heard and perused the material available on record. The learned Government Pleader for Appeals contended that the Land Acquisition Officer has duly taken note of transactions that had taken place within a period of three years prior to issuance of draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and fixed the correct market value and that since a small extent is covered under Exs.A2 and A3, the same cannot be taken as comparable sale, and as such, the enhancement made by the Court below on the basis of Exs.A2 and A3 is liable to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants opposed the said contentions on the ground that Exs.A2 and A3 are genuine transactions, though the land covered under the said documents is a small extent, and the trial Court rightly fixed the market value of the acquired land and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. On a perusal of the material on record, it is clear that the acquired land is situated in Kondair village and the same was acquired by notification, dated 23.5.2002 and the possession was taken on 14.9.1995. The evidence of P.W.2 goes to show that the land of an extent of Ac.0.27 guntas situated in the same village was sold under Ex.A2 on 27.10.1999 at the rate of Rs.80,000/- per acre. The evidence of P.W.3 goes to that that the land of an extent of Ac.1.00 of land in Kondair village was purchased under Ex.A3 at the rate of Rs.80,000/-. Further the evidence of P.W.4 goes to show that the land situated at Thimmapur village was acquired for the purpose of A.P. Police Battalion vide notification dated 22.3.1985 and on reference, the Civil Court fixed the compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre vide Ex.A4. Ex.B1-award relied upon by the Land Acquisition Officer, goes to show that an extent of Ac.0-2 guntas dry was sold on 24.10.2000 for a consideration of Rs.49,800/- i..e, Rs.9,96,000/- per acre; an extent of Ac.0.12 guntas was sold on 14.7.2000 for sale consideration of Rs.44,200/- i..e, Rs.1,47,333/- per acre; an extent of Ac.0.02 guntas was sold on 9.12.1999 for a sale consideration of Rs.23,100/- i.e., Rs.1,21,281/- per acre; an extent of Ac.1.00 was sold on 3.11.1999 at the rate of Rs.80,000/- per acre and an extent of Ac.0.32 guntas was sold on 27.2.2001 at the rate of Rs.66,750/- per acre. But the Land Acquisition Officer discarded all the sale transactions shown in Ex.B1 and he placed reliance on award No.18 of 2000 dated 11.12.2000, whereby the market value was fixed at Rs.28,000/- per acre for dry lands. It is pertinent to note that in a case of this nature, it is desirable to take into consideration the documentary evidence pertaining to the same village. The land in the present case is situated in Kondair village. The lands covered by Exs.A2 and A3 are situated in the same village and the transactions under Exs.A2 and A3 took place in the year 1999 and the lands in the present case were acquired by notification dated 23.5.2002. It is also not disputed that the acquired land has got irrigation sources. Further, nothing adverse was pointed out between the lands covered under Exs.A2 and A3 and the present acquired lands with regard to fertility, potentiality and nature. Further, the genuineness of the transactions under Exs.A2 and A3 is not disputed. But it is the contention of the learned Government Pleader that the land covered under Exs.A2 and A3 is very small extent and therefore, it cannot be taken as a comparable sale. When the said transactions are bona fide, they can be taken as comparable sale for the purpose of determining the market value as on the date of notification even though it is for a small extent. Taking all the above aspects into consideration, the Court below awarded the compensation. Therefore, we feel that the Court below has rightly adjudicated the matter and that the compensation fixed by the Court below does not warrant any interference. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ N.V.RAMANA, J _______________ K.S. APPA RAO, J Dated: 20.07.2011 Nn THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO L.A.A.S. No.999 OF 2007 (Judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana) 20.7.2011 Nn