IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE THIRTEEN (13TH) DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.3005 of 1999 Between: The Tahsildar and & Land Acquisition Officer, Kurnool …Appellant And: Mohd. Mustafa Alikahan & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.3005 of 1999 JUDGMENT: [per AGR, J] This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894, by the Tahsildar and Land Acquisition Officer, Kurnool, aggrieved by the enhancement of the compensation made in OP No.310 of 1988 dated 31.08.1994 by the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Kurnool. 2. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 [for short ‘the Act] acquiring an extent of Ac.9.83 cents of land was issued on 18.09.1978 for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections and possession of the land was taken on 27.01.1979. The Land Acquisition Officer during award enquiry categorized the land into two categories and fixed the compensation at Rs.10,000/- per acre for category I and Rs.8,000/- per acre for category II and for the mango trees, separate compensation of Rs.46,800/- was fixed. The claimants having received the amount of compensation under protest, sought for reference of the matter to the Civil Court and on reference being made to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act, the same was numbered as OP No.310 of 1988. On receipt of the notices, the claimants filed claim statements seeking compensation at Rs.35,000/- per acre and Rs.1,07,000/- for mango trees, as against Rs.46,800/- awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. 3. To substantiate the enhancement of the market value, the claimants examined RWs.1 to 3 and Exs.B.1 and B.2 registration copies of sale deed dated 6.2.1976 for Rs.5,000/- and sale deed dated 1.9.1976 for Rs.3,000/- were marked. On behalf of the referring Officer except marking Ex.A.1 objections filed by the claimants, no other evidence was adduced. 4. RW.1 deposed that his son purchased an extent of 5 cents of kallam land for Rs.5,000/- on 6.2.1978 under original of Ex.B.1 and the acquired lands are situated at a distance of 50 yards from kallam land purchased by his son and they used to raise two crops in a year with the water of K.C.Canal and each acre costs Rs.50,000/- as on the date of acquisition. Whereas, RW.2 in the cross-examination stated that he sold 3 cents of land in Sy.No.188 of Nidzur village on 1.9.1976 for Rs.3,000/- under Ex.B.2 sale deed and the acquired lands are situated at a distance of 50 ft. from the lands covered by Ex.B.2 and fit for house sites and kallams and the acquired lands were supplied water through KC canal. RW.3, who is the second claimant, deposed that his lands are being irrigated by KC canal water, which are adjacent to Nidzur village, which situated just by the side of the Nidzur road, which leads to Kurnool – Sunkesula road. The acquired lands were suited for house sites and also for agricultural purposes. 5. Under Ex.B.1, only Ac.0.05 cents of land was sold at Rs.5,000/- whereas under Ex.B.2, Ac.0.03 cents of land was sold at Rs.3,000/- and both the lands were being used as kallams. Thus, the evidence on record shows that the sites can be used as kallams and there was village near the same. In the cross-examination RW.2 deposed that the kallam land costs more price than the agricultural land. Therefore, the lower Court, rightly discarded the said transaction for the purpose of fixation of the market value. There is no other evidence available on record except the discussion made by the Land Acquisition Officer in his award, where various extents of lands, which were sold in the year 1976 at the rate of Rs.15,500/- per acre and the Land Acquisition Officer himself relied upon the sale deed dated 03.02.1976 where 60 cents of land was sold at Rs.12,567/- per acre in the year 1976 and after giving escalation for 2½ years for the acquired land, fixed the market value at Rs.17,500/- per acre for category I and Rs.14,000/- for category II land. It is also brought to our notice that there are 41-mango tress and 40 other trees in the acquired land. Therefore, the lands were being used as mango garden as on the date of acquisition, having potential value as garden lands. 6. Having regard to the same, fixation of the market value by the civil Court hypothetically at Rs.17,500/- per acre for category I land and Rs.14,000/- per acre for category II land is a reasonable compensation, which the claimant is entitled to. Further, the acquired lands are fit for house sites having proximity to the residential locality and situate 4 KMs away from Kurnool town. 7. We see no merits in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 13.04.2010 BSS