THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR L.A.A.S.No.162 of 2006 Date: 08.09.2009 Between: The Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Represented by its General Manager, Godavarikhani, Karimnagar District. …..Appellant And Kondilla Neelaiah, died per L.R. and others. ……Respondents Counsel for the appellant: SRI N. SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.7 & 7: SRI G. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) by the Singareni Collieries Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘SCCL’) is directed against the order, dated 25.07.2005, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Manthani in O.P.No.13 of 2001, whereby the reference Court fixed the compensation for the acquired lands @ Rs.25,000/- per acre and Rs.300/- per big, Rs.200/- per medium and Rs.100/- per small sendhi trees. 2 . A total extent of Acs.21.05 guntas of land, which includes Acs.14.03 guntas belonging to the respondents/claimants herein, in Survey Nos.82 and 83 along with structures, wells and trees situated in Penchikalpet Village, Kamanpur Mandal, Karimnagar District was acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer, L.A. Unit, SCCL, Godavarikhani, for coal mining. Draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in the A.P. Gazette on 30.06.1989 and draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 03.07.1989, whereas possession of the land was taken on 22.08.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer conducted award enquiry, obtained sale statistics of three years preceding the date of notification, and passed award on 17.06.1991 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.7,100/- per acre. 3. As there was a dispute with regard to the title of the acquired lands, on passing the award by the Land Acquisition Officer the matter was referred to the Subordinate Judge, Peddapally under Section 30 of the Act. The learned Subordinate Judge passed a decree in view of compromise between the parties in O.P.No.3 of 1992 dated 07.09.1992. As per the said decree dated 07.09.1992 passed in terms of the compromise, claimant No.1 is entitled to Acs.5.01 guntas in Survey No.82, claimant No.2 is entitled to Acs.4.33 guntas in Survey Nos.82 and 83, claimant No.3 is entitled to Acs.5.14 guntas in Survey Nos.82 and 83, claimant No.4 is entitled to Acs.8.22 guntas in Survey Nos.82 and 83, and claimant No.5 is entitled to 20 guntas of land. 4. Dissatisfied with the fixation of the market value, when the claimants sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act, the same was registered as O.P.No.56 of 1996 on the file of Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Peddapalli. Later, the matter was transferred to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Manthani and it was re-numbered as O.P.No.13 of 2001. On receipt of notices, the claimants appeared before the reference Court and filed their respective claim statements claiming compensation @ Rs.50,000/- per acre for the acquired land, Rs.300/- per big, Rs.200/- per medium and Rs.100/- per small sendhi trees. 5. The Land Acquisition Officer filed a counter in support of the Award passed by him and denied about the existence of sendhi trees in the acquired land. 6. In order to prove the market value of the acquired land and the trees standing thereon, on behalf of the claimants, claimant No.2 was examined himself as P.W.1 and four more witnesses were examined as P.Ws.2 to 5 and Exs.A.1 to A.4 were marked. On behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, R.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.B.1 to B.6 were marked. Exs.C.1 to C.3 i.e., Warrant of the Advocate Commissioner, Report cum Certification and Panchanama prepared by S.I of Prohibition and Excise were marked by the Court. 7 . Considering the entire material available on record, the reference Court, by the impugned order, answered the reference in favour of the claimants fixing the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.25,000/- per acre and the value of the trees as aforementioned. 8. Sri N.Subba Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that Exs.A.1 and A.2 sale deeds pertain to the Village of Maredpaka, where an extent of Acs.1.20 guntas and Acs.0.02 guntas of land were sold @ Rs.30,000/- per acre and Rs.1,60,000/- per acre respectively. Similarly, Ex.A.4 sale deed, dated 12.05.1987 also pertains to the Village of Maredpaka, where 20 guntas of land was sold for Rs.15,000/-, which works out to Rs.30,000/- per acre. Hence, the above three sale deeds cannot be taken into consideration as they are situated in some other village. Similarly, Ex.A.3 pertains to Allur Village of Kamanpur Mandal, where an extent of Acs.1.08 guntas of land was sold for Rs.36,000/-, which works out to Rs.30,000/- per acre, and the same also cannot be taken into consideration for fixation of the market value, as the said sale deed also pertain to some other village. He further contended that as per the report of the Advocate Commissioner, only 902 sendhi trees were existing when he visited the acquired land, and therefore, awarding compensation @ Rs.300/-, Rs.200/- and Rs.100/- per each big, medium and small sendhi trees respectively by the Court below is only based on the number given by the claimants in the claim statement and the impugned order cannot be sustainable and the same is liable to be set aside. He further contended that under Ex.B.5 an extent of Ac.1.00 guntas of land situated in Survey No.29/1 of Penchikalpet Village of Kamanpur Mandal was sold at Rs.7,100/- per acre, and the same was relied upon by the Land Acquisition Officer while passing the award. Therefore, the enhancement made by the Court below for the acquired lands cannot be sustained. But, the learned counsel fairly conceded that the claimants are entitled to escalation having regard to the potentiality of the lands and having deposits of the coalmines in that lands. He also conceded that the acquired land is situated at a distance of 1.1 k.m from the lands covered by Exs.A.1 to A.4. 9. On the other hand, Sri L.Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants contended that the acquired lands are having high potential value with coal mining deposits, and therefore, the claimants cannot be deprived of the just compensation of the acquired lands on the ground that no sale deeds of the same village are available. P.W.1, who is claimant No.2 stated that when it was specifically mentioned in the claim statement that there were 200 big, 1500 medium and 2000 small sendhi trees in the acquired land, the same was not referred to in the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer and that the Commissioner also reported that in the acquired lands four acres were bulldozed after acquisition, due to which the sendhi trees therein were destroyed. Therefore, the claimants cannot be deprived of the just compensation for the sendhi trees. 10. P.W.1 deposed that the acquired lands are located in the command area of S.R.S.P and have got great building, industrial, commercial and business potentiality; that the properties acquired are located in Urban area i.e., Municipal Limits of Ramagundam notified area; that they are surrounded by the buildings, factories, industrial, residential and commercial establishments, poultries and other manufacturing units; that Penchikalpet Village is situated at a distance of 3 K.m from coal mine belt area and a distance of 30 K.m from Peddapalli Division Head Quarters connected on the tar road leading from Godavarikhani main PWD road to Manthani Peddapalli; and that the lands sold under Exs.A.1, A.3 and A.4 are very close to the acquired lands. In the cross-examination, he deposed that patta books were attested by Sub-Registrar and Revenue Divisional Officer, Manthani. He also stated that when inspection was made by the Revenue Divisional Officer in the acquired land there were 200 big, 1500 medium and 2000 small sendhi trees. He denied the suggestion that Penchikalpet Village is at a distance of 20 to 30 Kms away from the lands covered by Exs.A.1 to A.4 and also the acquired lands. 11. P.W.2 deposed that the acquired lands are very fertile and are located in command area of S.R.S.P. He also deposed that the acquired lands are situated in the industrial belt area of S.C.C.L, FCI, NTPC and Kesoram Cement Factory. They are also surrounded by industrial and commercial buildings, residential establishments, poultries and other manufacturing units. He further deposed that under Ex.A.1 he sold an extent of Acs.1.20 guntas of dry land in Survey No.324 of Maredpaka Village, which is close to the acquired lands, for Rs.45,000/-, which works out of Rs.30,000/- per acre. The acquired lands are more fertile, potential and valuable than the land sold by him under Ex.A.1. He further deposed that he also sold 242 square yards i.e., Ac.0.02 guntas of land situated in Survey No.252 of Maredpaka Village of Ramagundam Mandal, Karimnagar District, which is close to the acquired lands, for a consideration of Rs.8,000/-, which works out to Rs.1,60,000/- per acre. In the cross-examination, he denied the suggestion that the distance between Godavarikhani, FCI, NTPC, Kesoram and SCCL is 15 to 20 Kms from the acquired lands. 12. P.W.3, who is the vendee under Ex.A.3, deposed that the market value of the acquired lands was not less than Rs.50,000/- per acre during the relevant period. He also deposed that he purchased an extent of Acs.1.08 guntas in Survey No.206 of Allur Village of Kamanpur Mandal, which is close to the acquired lands, for Rs.36,000/-, which works out to Rs.30,000/- per acre. He denied the suggestion that the distance between Maredpaka and Penchikalpet Villages is 20 Kms. 13. P.W.4 is the vendor of the land under Ex.A.4-sale deed. He supported the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3 and deposed that he sold 20 guntas of land in Survey No.18/4-B of Maredupaka Village for Rs.15,000/-, which works out to Rs.30,000/- per acre. 14. The Estate Manager of SCCL was examined as R.W.1. He filed an affidavit in lieu of examination in chief stating that the sale deeds under Exs.A.1 to A.4 cannot be relied on for fixing the market value of the acquired lands. In the cross-examination, he denied the existence of sendhi trees in the acquired lands. He admitted that the lands acquired are near OCP III of SCCL and that some other lands were acquired in Penchikalpet Village for rehabilitation of the persons, whose houses were acquired in different villages. 15. The Deputy Tahasildar, Office of Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit, Godavarikhani was examined as R.W.2. He also filed an affidavit in lieu of examination in chief. In the cross- examination, he stated that he do not know whether any sendhi trees were existing in the acquired lands at the time of acquisition. But, as per the award, there were no trees in the acquired lands and he was not present when the Advocate Commissioner visited the acquired lands and noted the existing trees. 16. R.W.3, who was working as Senior Surveyor Officer at Medipalli Opencast Project of Ramagundam – III Area of SCCL at the time of acquisition, filed an affidavit in lieu of examination in chief stating that the lands in Penchikalpet Village were acquired for OCP-III and that he had personally inspected the acquired lands and the lands covered by the sale deeds relied upon by the Land Acquisition Officer as well as the claimants. There is no similarity of the lands covered by Ex.A.1 and the acquired lands with regard to the potentiality, texture and nature. The sale deeds of the lands relied upon by the claimants in Maredupaka and Alluru Villages are at Ramagundam Mandal falling in the limits of Ramagundam Municipality, whereas the acquired lands are in Penchikalpet Village of Kamanpur Mandal falling in the Grampanchayat limits. 17. As per Ex.B.6, the lands covered by Exs.A.1, A.2 and A.4 are on the southern side of Opencast-III External O.B. Dump Yard, whereas the acquired lands of Penchkalpet Village are on the southern side of Opencast-III External O.B. Dump Yard. Though the lands covered by the sale deeds under Exs.A.1, A.2 and A.4 and the acquired land are situated in different villages, the said documents can be taken into consideration for fixation of the market value of the acquired lands. Further, the lands of Allur Village are contiguous to Penchikalpet rehabilitation area. 18. Though Sri N.Subba Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant has not seriously disputed with regard to the location of the land and proximity to the developed area, he contended that since the lands covered by Exs.A.1 to A.3 are situated in developed area and as large extent of land was acquired, 1/3rd has to be deducted. We do not see any force in the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel. 19. In the circumstances, taking into consideration that the market value of the lands towards Northern and Southern sides of Opencast-III External O.B. Dump Yard, and after giving 1/3rd deduction, we fix the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. 20. Coming to the compensation for sendhi trees, the claimants are entitled to a share in the revenue collected by the Excise Department on the said trees even if they are big, medium or small. The Advocate Commissioner, who visited the acquired lands, noticed that four acres of land was bulldozed, due to which, many sendhi trees therein were damaged and uprooted. In the remaining acquired land, he noticed 902 trees. Therefore, to put a quietus to the litigation, we can take another 348 trees, as the number of trees existed in Acs.4.00 guntas of land, which was bulldozed as per the report under Ex.C.2. We, accordingly, take total number of sendhi trees standing in the acquired land at 1250 and award a sum of Rs.150/- per each tree irrespective of their ages. 21. In the result, the appeal is allowed modifying the impugned order to the extent indicated above. It is made clear that the claimants are entitled to all statutory benefits under Act 68 of 1984, as held by the Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India[1]. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J ________________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J Date: 08.09.2009 va [1] AIR 2001 SC 3516