HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NOs.1062, 1092, 1101, 1160 and 2000 of 2004 Dt.5.10.2010 A.S.No.1062 of 2004 Between: G.Chinnaiah ..Appellant And Special Deputy Collector (L.A), S.R.B.C., Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Respondent A.S.No.1092 of 2004 Between: Manchalakatta Pullamma ..Appellant And Special Deputy Collector (L.A), S.R.B.C., Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Respondent A.S.No.1101 of 2004 Between: D.Chinna Subbarayudu ..Appellant And Special Deputy Collector (L.A), S.R.B.C., Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Respondent A.S.No.1160 of 2004 Between: B.Yella Subbaiah ..Appellant And Special Deputy Collector (L.A), S.R.B.C., Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Respondent A.S.No.2000 of 2004 Between: G.Ramudu ..Appellant And Special Deputy Collector (L.A), S.R.B.C., Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NOs.1062, 1092, 1101, 1160 and 2000 of 2004 COMMON JUDGMENT (Per Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) Heard Sri V.Nataraja Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants and the learned Government Pleader for appeals. Since the issue involved in all these appeals is common and arise out of common order and decree of the Reference Court, the appeals are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. All these appeals are filed by the claimants against the common order dated 6.3.2000 in O.P.Nos.103, 108, 102, 106 and 104 of 1991 respectively on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal. Appellants herein are the claimants and the respondent herein is the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), S.R.B.C., Nandyal. Various extents of land of the appellants situate in Panyam village in respect of Sy.Nos.1431, 1428/1, 1372/2 and 1433/2 was acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer vide notification dated 26.4.1990 issued under Section 41) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, the Act), for excavation of main canal of S.R.B.C. Division No.1. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award No.8/90-91, dated 17.7.1990, fixing the market value at the rate of Rs.6,700/- per acre and in some cases at Rs.6,200/- per acre. On the applications filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, the matter was referred under Section 18 of the Act and the Reference Court basing on oral and documentary evidence fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.19,250/- per acre. Aggrieved by the same, the claimants filed these appeals. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submits that aggrieved by the common order dated 6.3.2000 of the Reference Court, the Land Acquisition Officer also filed appeals in A.S.Nos.1781 to 1787 of 2000 on the file of this Court and this Court confirmed the said common order by judgment dated 23.4.2007. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- claimants submits that the lands acquired are situated in Panyam village which is a major Gram Panchayat and the population of the said village is about 40,000 and a Bank, police station, Sub-Registrar’s office, Railway Station, Junior College, Co-operative Bank,, High School, Government Hospital etc., are situated in Panyam village. It is business center and the said lands are acquired by the Government for the purpose of S.R.B.C. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed meager compensation of Rs.6,700/- per acre in some cases, Rs.6,200/- per acre and Rs.2,000/- per acre in some other cases and on reference, the Reference Court also enhanced meager sum in respect of the O.Ps., at the uniform rate at Rs.19,250/- per acre. It is stated that the prevailing market value at the relevant time of 4(1) notification is Rs.40,000/- per acre and some of them have claimed at Rs.60,000/- per acre. Before the Reference Court, on behalf of the claimant, the claimant in O.P.No.101 of 1991 (A.S.No.1781 of 2000) was examined as R.W.1, another claimant in O.P.No.106 of 1991 (A.S.No.1785 of 2000) was examined as R.W.2, the vendors of Ex.B-1 and Ex.B-6 sale deeds were examined as R.Ws.3 and 4 and Exhibits B-1 to B-6 were also marked. On behalf of the Referring Officer, Ex.A-1 award was marked. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that as per Ex.B-1 certified copy of the order in O.P.No.91 of 1985, R.W.3 purchased Ac.0.09 cents of land for Rs.9,000/- i.e., at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. Under Ex.B-6 sale deed, R.W.4 sold an extent of Ac.3.82 cents for a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- i.e., at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre. R.W.3 stated that he has purchased Ac.0.09 cents of land on 6.11.1985 for Rs.9000/- under Ex.B-5. Ex.B-5 shows that Ac.0.09 cents of land in S.No.1258 situated in Panyam village was sold at the rate of Rs.9,000/-. It is stated that the Reference Court erroneously declined to place reliance on Exs. B-4 and B-5 on the ground that the proximity of the said land is not established. However, Exs.B-5 and B-6 sale transaction relates to house sites. In so far as oral statement of R.W.1 with regard to the income said to have been derived is concerned, the Reference Court held that except the self-serving statement, no material has been placed. Ex.B-4 sale transaction is in respect of S.No.1266. The Reference Court mainly relied on the oral deposition of R.W.1 as admitted by himself in the cross-examination stating that one year prior to the acquisition of their lands, he has sold Ac.1.00 for Rs.17,500/- and the said statement of R.W.1 has been believed by the Reference Court in taking into account 10% escalation and fixed the market value at the rate Rs.19,250/- per acre. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as against the documentary evidence, the oral deposition of the claimants ought not to have been relied on in respect of the same lands in Panyam village, the Reference Court fixed the compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre in respect of the acquisition made under Section 4(1) of the Act, dated 22.4.1990, and the orders in O.P.Nos.32 and 34 of 1991 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, dated 8.8.2000, are upheld by this Court in A.S.Nos.1011 and 1012 of 2001 by common judgment, dated 31.1.2003. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submits that the appeals filed by the Land Acquisition Officer against the very self-same O.Ps., which are subject matter of these appeals are dismissed and therefore the claimants are not entitled for any enhancement of compensation. We have considered the rival contentions. It is not in dispute that an extent of Ac.32.66 cents of land situated in Panyam village was acquired for excavation of main canal of S.R.B.C Division No.1 pursuant to the draft notification dated 26.4.1990. The Land Acquisition Officer, after considering the sale transactions of some other lands, fixed the market value from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.6,700/- per acre. On reference, the Reference Court fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.19,250/-. It is not in dispute that R.W.1, one of the claimants, admitted that he had sold Ac.1.00 for a sum of Rs.17,500/- to a third party one year prior to 4(1) notification. The statement of R.W.1 is uncontroverted with regard to the sale of lands by willing seller to willing purchaser for Rs.17,500/- one year prior to 4(1) notification. Admittedly, the land in respect of Ex.B-1 was acquired for the purpose of construction of staff quarters. If the sale transaction covered by Ex.B-1 is genuine, it cannot be said to be a comparable sale and hence the evidence of R.W.3 and the transaction covered by Ex.B-5 cannot be made basis for assessment of the market value of the land under acquisition. In so far as Exs.B-5 and B-6 sale deeds are concerned, the land acquired for house sites was sold at the rate of Rs.9,000/- per acre which was in different survey number. Therefore, the said sale transaction cannot be compared with the acquired lands in the instant case. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the trial court has rightly declined to place reliance on Ex.B-5. In so far as Ex.B-6 sale transaction is concerned, an extent of Ac.3.82 cents was sold for Rs.1,90,000/- which roughly comes to Rs.50,000/- per acre and Ex.B-6 is dated 29.4.1992 i.e., two years after 4(1) notification. Therefore, Ex.B-6 is also no helpful for the claimants. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the Reference Court has rightly placed reliance on the admission made by R.W.1 with regard to the sale of the land at Rs.17,500/- per acre one year prior to the acquisition of the land in question and by giving 10% escalation, fixed the market value at Rs.19,250/- per acre. No sale transactions covered self-same survey numbers have been placed by the claimants. In view of their own admission in the cross-examination about the sale of land at Rs.17,500/- one year prior to the acquisition, we are of the opinion that the market value fixed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs.19,250/- per acre is just and reasonable. We do not see any merit in these appeals. In the result, the appeals are accordingly dismissed, confirming the impugned common order passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal. However, the claimants are entitled to all other statutory benefits. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 5.10.2010 kpr