HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO A.S.No.192 of 2000 Date:22-09-2011 Between: Pasupuleti Raja Gopal Sai Prasad and another …….. Appellants And Land Acquisition Officer/Mandal Revenue Officer, Srikalahasti, Chittoor District and others ……….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO A.S.No.192 of 2000 JUDGMENT: (Per AGR,J) This Appeal, under Section 96 of the of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed by Respondent/Claimant Nos.1 and 2 against the order dated 05-10-1999 passed in O.P.No.27 of 1995 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Srikalahasti. The appellants and the contesting respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein are the respondents/claimants before the Reference Court. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the dry lands of the claimants to an extent of Ac.1-61 cents in S.No.57/2 of in Srikalahasti village were acquired by the Government for the purpose of formation of bye-pass road across Swarnamukhi River of Srikalahasti and Panagal village, by issuing the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). The Land Acquisition Officer, after due enquiry, passed the award dated 31-05-1994 in Award No.1 of 1994 fixing the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.40,000/- per acre. However, as there was a dispute with regard to the payment of compensation amount among the claimants, a Reference was made to the Reference Court under Section 30 of the Act. 3. During the course of enquiry before the Reference Court, on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, no oral or documentary evidence was adduced. However, on behalf of the claimants, RWs.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.B-1 to B-33 were got marked. The Reference Court, after considering the entire evidence on record, answered the Reference holding that Respondent/claimant Nos.1 to 3 are entitled to receive compensation for an extent of Ac.0-25 cents, Respondent/claimant No.4 is entitled to receive compensation for an extent of Ac.0-55 cents and Respondent/claimant No.5 is entitled to receive compensation for an extent of Ac.0-81 cents, in total Ac.1-61 cents. Aggrieved by the same, Respondent/Claimant Nos.1 and 2 preferred the present appeal. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and Sri V. Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent No.3, and gone through the entire evidence and the material on record. 5. It is not in dispute that one late P. Venkataswamy is the father of late P. Venkaiah Chetty and late P. Srinivasulu Chetty. Respondent No.3 herein is the second son of late Srinivasulu Chetty, whereas P. Venkaiah Chetty has two sons by name late Changaiah Chetty and late Rajagopal. The appellants are the sons of late Rajagopal. Respondent No.2 herein is the son of late Changaiah Chetty, whereas respondent No.4 herein is the wife of Respondent No.2. 6. The claim of the appellants is that the property, which is the subject matter of the acquisition, is inherited by their grandfather late Venkaiah Chetty from his father-in-law K. Changaiah Chetty under Ex.B-30, registered will, dated 28-07-1917. Therefore, it is the self-acquired property of late Venkaiah Chetty in which Respondent No.3 cannot have any right or claim and that the heirs of late Venkaiah Chetty alone are entitled to receive the entire compensation awarded for the acquired lands. Whereas Respondent No.3 herein claims that the property is the joint family property inherited by his father late Srinivalusu Chetty and appellants’ grandfather Venkaiah Chetty, who are the sons of late Venkata Swamy, and that the said property was partitioned among all the heirs by the elders, who are the mediators to the partition, and pursuant to the same, pattedar passbooks were also issued under Ex.B-5 followed by the certified copy of the adangal under Ex.B-7 showing their respective shares as per the partition. From out of the properties partitioned, an extent of Ac.0-25 cents from the properties of respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Ac.0-55 cents from the properties of respondent No.4 and Ac.0-81 cents from the properties of respondent No.5 were acquired. 7. To prove their respective contentions before the Reference Court, appellant No.2 himself was examined as RW-1, whereas Respondent No.3 himself was examined as RW-2 and Respondent No.4 himself was examined as RW-3, and got marked Exs.B-1 to B-31. However, it is not necessary to discuss the entire evidence as the same has already been elaborately discussed by the Reference Court. RW-1 stated that the property admeasuring to an extent of Ac.16-50 cents originally belongs to their ancestor P. Venkaiah Chetty S/o. Venkata Swamy, which was got by him from his father-in-law by name K. Changaiah Chetty through Ex.B-30, registered will, dated 25-07-1917 and the name of Venkaiah Chetty was also entered in the revenue records. It is not in dispute that Venkaiah Chetty had two sons by name Changaiah Chetty, father of Respondent No.2, and Rajagopal, father of the appellants. 8. To disprove the said contention of the appellants, respondent No.3 himself was examined as RW-2. He stated that in the year 1967, there was a dispute among the parties and they attempted for partition of the joint family properties by way of arbitration. One Guruswamy Chetty, Changalrayudu and some other elders mediated and passed an award dividing the properties. As per the award, half of the properties were allotted to his father Srinivasulu Chetty and the remaining half of the properties were allotted to Venkaiah Chetty’s family. Pursuant to the said partition, Ex.B-5 pattedar passbook also has been issued wherein the survey number is mentioned as ‘57’ and the total extent is mentioned as Ac.16-50 cents and his share is mentioned as Ac.4-12 cents and Venkata Rathnam Chetty also got Ac.0-85 cents, P. Rajagopal Chetty got Ac.0-71 cents and Prakash Rao got Ac.0-25 cents. Further Ex.B-6, which is the certified copy of 10(1) account for Faslis 1390, shows the names of all the persons and the extents allotted to them. Ex.B-7 is the certified copy of No.2 Adangal and No.3 is the pahani pathrika and they show that the said property is the joint family property and it was divided among the members, and in order to further substantiate the same, Respondent No.3 filed Ex.B-24, cist receipts. 9. The lower Court, while taking into consideration the entire documentary evidence, discussed the effect of Ex.B-24 at para-17 of the judgment and accepted the claim of Respondent No.3 herein for an extent of Ac.0-55 cents, which was acquired from out of his share, and held that he is entitled to receive the compensation for an extent of Ac.0- 55 cents. 10. In Ex.B-30, registered will, dated 28-07-1917, under which the appellants are claiming, no survey numbers have been mentioned to substantiate their plea that their grandfather late Venkaiah Chetty inherited to the property through his father-in- law K. Changaiah Chetty through the said will. Further the said property was divided among all the members of the joint family by the arbitrators through the award and pursuant to the said award, the names of the respective family members with respective shares were also mutated in the revenue records and pattedar passbooks were also issued. In view of the same, the claim of the appellants basing on Ex.B-30 cannot be accepted. The Reference Court appreciated the entire evidence in right perspective and rightly answered the Reference. No illegality or irregularity has been pointed by the learned counsel in answering the Reference by the Reference Court, warranting interference by this Court. There are no merits in this appeal and it is liable to be dismissed. 11. The Appeal Suit is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J _______________ K.S. APPA RAO, J Date: 22-09-2011 YCR