IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD …………….DAY, THE …………. DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S. NO.2081 OF 1995 Between: 1. Pyla Ramayamma. 2. Pyla Satyavathi. 3. Gundra Padmavathi. - - - APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS AND The Land Acquisition Officer-cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada. - - - REFERRING OFFICER/ RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S. NO.2081 OF 1995 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The Claimants are the Appellants. The Respondent is the Land Acquisition Officer. An extent of Ac.4-64 cents in Survey Nos. 260, 261/2B and 261/3A situated at Pithapuram village was acquired for the purpose of construction of Agricultural Market Yard, pursuant to Section 4(1) notification dated 29-10-1990. 2) For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred to as they are arrayed before the Reference Court. 3) The Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.1 of 1992 by fixing the market value of the lands acquired at the rate of Rs.24,000/- per acre. The claimants made the claim statements claiming Rs.75,000/- per acre and afterwards they raised the value of the lands up to Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. On the applications of the claimants, the LAO referred the matter to the Civil Court U/s.18 of the Land Acquisition Act in O.P.130 of 1992 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Pithapuram. The learned Subordinate Judge, Pithapuram, by the impugned order dated 30-06-1995 enhanced the compensation from Rs.24,000/- to Rs.50,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said Order, this Appeal is filed seeking further enhancement at the rate of Rs.50/- per sq. yard and for the total extent of Ac.4.64 cents it works out to Rs.2,32,000/-. 4) The learned counsel appearing for the Appellants submits that neither the Land Acquisition Officer nor the Reference Court correctly appreciated the objections filed by the claimants. The lands acquired are situated abutting to the main road. As per Exs.A-1 to A-4 sale deeds, the market value of the lands is more than Rs.50/- per sq. yard and Exs.A-5 to A-7 show that the lands acquired are in the industrial area and the claimants claimed the compensation at the rate of Rs.200/- per sq. yard. It is further stated that, the Court below did not take into consideration the extracts of the market values furnished by the Special Registrars and the oral evidence was also not considered properly. When there was no rebuttal evidence adduced on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, it is stated that the Court below has not found that the lands acquired are in the industrial and developed area, and arbitrarily fixed the compensation of Rs.50,000/- per acre, though the transactions covered by Exs.A-8, A-12 and A-14 show that the value of the similar land is Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. 5) Heard both the counsel. 6) On behalf of the claimants, PWs. 1 to 5 were examined and Exs. A-1 to A-15 were marked. PW.1 deposed that first claimant is his mother and second claimant is his wife. He stated that his mother purchased the property in Survey No.261 of an extent of Ac.1-70 situated at Pithapuram village. Ex.A-1 is the registration extract of the sale deed dated 20-12-1977 and his wife purchased Ac.3.30 cents in Survey No.260 dry-wet land under Ex.A-2 registered sale deed, and out of the total extent of Ac.5-00 cents, only Ac.4.64 cents was acquired. It is stated that the land is situated abutting the main road towards Pithapuram at Chitrada railway gate leading from Pithapuram to Kakinada. There are saw mills, degree colleges, residential houses within a short distance of the acquired land and the lands acquired are situated behind the railway gate towards Chitrada which is an industrial area. Ex.A-3 is the Registration extract of the Sale Deed dated 12-05-1988 which shows that 393 sq. yards of house site was sold at the rate of Rs.121/- per sq. yard. Ex.A-4 is the registration extract of the sale deed dated 12-03-1990 which shows that an extent of 240 sq. yards of land was sold at the rate of Rs.50/- per sq. yard. To the immediate north of the acquired extent, Sri Radha Krishna Saw Mill is situated at Door No.13-2-94 and the market value of the northern side of the lands acquired for the saw mill is Rs.200/- per sq. yard but when PW.1 has applied to the Registration Authorities, it was informed that the then present value is only Rs.100/- per sq. yard. The value of the acquired lands is Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. But the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation only at the rate of Rs.24,000/- per acre. It is stated that as far as the third claimant is concerned, there was a compromise between them agreeing to pay a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- in full and final settlement and the claimants have no objection for receipt of Rs.1,05,000/- by the third claimant out of the compensation which was referred under Section 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act. The said dispute was already resolved and therefore the third claimant is formally added as party to the Appeal to support the claim of the Appellants for enhancement of the compensation. It is stated that the lands covered by Ex.A-4 sale deed is in survey No.280 and there is a thatched house in the site covered by Ex.A-3, the survey numbers of the lands acquired for the industrial purpose do not find place in Ex.A-1 to A-5. Ex.A-13 is the village plan of Pithapuram showing the area as industrial area, the survey Nos. 408 to 411 which are to the north of the acquired lands are declared as industrial area, Survey Nos.263 to 265 and 267 which are on the south side of the acquired lands were declared as residential area, western side of the lands in Survey No.259 is also declared as industrial area. The lands towards the east of the road were declared as residential area but PW.1 says that he does not have any personal knowledge about the details of Ex.A-13 village plan. 7) PW.2 is the husband of one Gurthurthi Suryakantham and stated that his wife sold Ac.0-25 cents to Murasa Satyanarayana in March, 1990 under Ex.A-11 and the said Satyanarayana constructed a building therein and leased out to degree college. He denied the suggestion that Ex.A-11 is fabricated document and higher sale transaction was shown. 8) PW.3 is a resident of Chitrada village. He stated that he sold 240 sq. yards situated in Survey No.281/3 at the rate of Rs.50/- per square yard. He denied the suggestion that Ex.A-4 is brought in collusion with the purchaser of 240 sq. yards after knowing the acquisition proceedings and actually he was in possession and enjoyment of the said property. 9) PW.4 is a resident of Pithapuram village and owner of the ice factory on the road leading from Pithapuram to Kakinada and stated that his ice factory is within the municipal limits of Pithapuram village known as industrial area. He denied the suggestion that he is not having any ice factory in Pithapuram, and admittedly he did not file any evidence to show the existence of the ice factory. 10) PW.5 is the husband of the third claimant. He stated that there was a settlement to the compromise to receive Rs.1,05,000/- only as far as the third claimant is concerned. 11) The question that arises for consideration is, whether the fixation of the market value by the Reference Court is just and reasonable? If not, what is the actual market value prevailing at the time of 4(1) notification? In terms of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, the factors that requires to be taken for determination of the amount of compensation have been explained by the Honourable Supreme Court, in Satish and Others V. State of U.P. and Others[1], are: 1) Price paid within the reasonable time in bona-fide transactions of the purchase of the land acquired or lands adjacent to the lands acquired and possessing similar advantages, 2) Number of year’s purchase of the actual or immediately prospective profits of the lands acquired, 3) Opinion of the experts, 4) The market value of the lands under acquisition has to be determined as on the crucial date of publication of notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act, 5) The comparable genuine sale transactions at the relevant point of time have to be taken into consideration. 12) It is not in dispute that the acquired land is only Ac.4.64 cents and the Land Acquisition Officer paid compensation at the rate of Rs.24,000/- per acre, totally amounting to Rs.1,64,960/-. The claimants filed objections claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.75,000/- per acre or Rs.200/- per sq. yard. On reference, the Reference Court enhanced the compensation fixing compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre. It is not in dispute that as per Ex.A-10 the lands abutting to the lands in question are declared as industrial area and based on the oral and documentary evidence, Exs.A-5 to A-7, A-10 to A-13, the Reference Court rightly held that the lands are situated abutting the industrial area. Exs.A-4 and A-11 sale transactions though prior to 4(1) notification, Ex.A-4 is in respect of the small extent of Ac.0.25 cents of the land alone and therefore the said transactions were rightly not taken into consideration by the Reference Court as per the various citations mentioned in the impugned order. Exs.A-12 and A-14 which reflects the sale transactions at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre, are much later than the 4(1) notification and therefore those transactions were also rightly not taken into consideration. But the Reference Court held that in view of Exs.A-5, A-6, A-10 and A-13 under which lands were acquired for the industrial purpose and which are surrounded by the lands in question the market value of the land is Rs.1,0,000/- per acre. It is not in dispute that the lands in question which were acquired were purchased by the mother and wife of PW.1 under Exs.A-1 and A-2 dated 20-12-1977. The Court below has taken into consideration Exs.A-5 to A-7 which are the provisional registration certificates and Ex.A-5 and A-6 the provisional registration certificates issued in favour of the industrial units of Sri Rama Alluminium re- rolling mill as well as ice factory and based on Exs.A-5 to A-7, A-10 and A-13, the value of the acquired land was enhanced from Rs.24,000/- to Rs.50,000/- per acre by the Reference Court. 13) We have considered the rival contentions and we are of the opinion that the only relevant documents that can be taken into consideration are Exs.A-4 and A-11 but as per Ex.A-11 the sale transaction is only to a small extent of Ac.0.25 cents. Whereas the total land acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer is Ac.4.64 cents. Both these sale deeds can be taken into consideration as Ex.A-4 sale deed covers an extent of Ac.2-40 sq. yards alone which was sold at the rate of Rs.50/- per sq. yard. Though Ex.A-11 cannot be taken into consideration in its entirety but it can be taken into consideration partly as the land under Ex.A-11 was purchased at the rate pertains to the sale transaction of Ac.0-25 cents which is admittedly prior to 4(1) notification. In fact PW.2 who is the husband of the vendor stated that his wife sold the land to an extent of Ac.0-25 cents under Ex.A-1 Registered Sale Deed, dated 01-03-1990 for Rs.20,000/-, which comes at the rate of Rs.80,000/- per acre. Therefore, Ex.A-11 is a relevant document which can be taken into consideration. It is stated by PW.2 that after purchase of the said land a degree college was constructed therein. Even if it is assumed that the acquired lands are useful for the house site and if the document in Ex.A-11 is taken into consideration, 1/3rd of the land has to be deducted towards amenities and for development such as roads, drainage, electrical lines etc., If that be so, the acquired lands are taken into consideration at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre and after deducting 1/3rd of the land towards amenities, the market value that would have been fetched on the date of acquisition is only Rs.66,667/- Accordingly, we are of the opinion that it is just and appropriate to fix the market value of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs.66,667/- per acre. 14) Accordingly the Appeal is allowed enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.66,667/- per acre. The claimants are entitled to all other statutory benefits as awarded in the O.P. on the enhanced compensation. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ___________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J Dated: -07-2010 Dsh [1] 2009 (3) A.P.L.J. 93 (SC)