THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO A.S.No.562 of 2002 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) The Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer), Palakonda, filed this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) aggrieved by the enhancement of compensation for the acquired lands by the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam in L.A.O.P.No.21 of 1999, dated 31.03.2001. The brief facts, which are relevant for disposal of the appeal, are as under: - The Government of Andhra Pradesh through draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act dated 22.03.1996 acquired Ac.6-63 cents of land located in Sy.Nos.313/1,2,3, 3 (1), 319, 320 and 312 of Veeraghattam Village for the purpose of providing house sites to weaker sections. On issuance of a declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 02.04.1996, the possession of the land was taken on 22.05.1996. The Land Acquisition Officer after complying with the necessary formalities passed an award on 21.07.1996 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.37,000/- per acre for dry lands and Rs.39,000/- per acre for wet lands. The claimants having not been satisfied with the fixation of the market value by the Land Acquisition Officer sought for reference of the matter to the civil Court and also filed W.P.No.6615 of 1999 before this Court for referring the matter to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court on 19.04.1999- Ex.A-4, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter to the civil Court. On receipt of the notice, claimant No.1 filed claim statement claiming that the acquired land was surrounded by rice mills, cinema halls, various industrial units, Agricultural market committee, a junior college, R & B travelers bungalow and many residential buildings and it has great potentialities to be converted into house sites. Also there is a lot of demand for house sites within the vicinity of the acquired land and hence, he claimed compensation of Rs.200/- per square yard for the acquired land. Claimants 2 and 3 filed a memo adopting the claim statement filed by claimant No.1. In order to substantiate the prevalent market value, on behalf of the claimants, P.Ws.1 to 5 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-5 were marked. On behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, R.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.B-1 to B-3 were marked. Apart from this, Exs.X-1 and X-2 were also marked. The lower Court after analyzing the oral and documentary evidence adduced by both the parties, fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.60,000/- per acre. Questioning the same, the present appeal has been filed. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for the appellant contends that once the reference Court held that the acquired land has to be valued as agricultural land, again enhancing the compensation basing upon the sale deeds under Exs.X-1 and X-2 does not arise; that no person connected with the said documents was examined and hence, the enhancement of compensation for the acquired land by the lower Court is not sustainable. P.W-4 who was examined to prove Ex.X-1 (equivalent to Ex.A-2) stated that he purchased Ac.0-10 cents of land under Ex.X-1 at the rate of Rs.90/- per square yard and the property covered by Ex.X-1-sale deed was a plot measuring 482 square yards, which is abutting the road on south and west. P.W-5 deposed that he purchased Ac.0.06 cents of land for Rs.20,300/- in the name of his wife under the original of Ex.X-2 for constructing a house. The evidence of P.Ws.4 and 5 disclose that the distance between the acquired land and Palakonda- Srikakulam road was about 150 yards; that the land abutting the main road was sold on square yard basis where residential houses are already in existence, apart from commercial establishments like rice mills, cinema halls, etc. R.W-1 in the cross-examination admitted that Veeraghattam Village is a major Gram Panchayat and supported the evidence of claimants that rice mills, cinema halls, government offices were existing near to the acquired land. He stated that the land covered under Ex.B-2-registration extract of sale deed, dated 18.02.1985, is at a distance of 1 km from the acquired land and that the acquired land is abutting the village limits of Veeraghattam surrounded by rice mills, cinema halls R & B bungalow and residential houses. Therefore, the fixation of market value by the Land Acquisition Officer basing upon Ex.B- 2-sale deed, does not reflect the true market value of the acquired land since the land covered under Ex.B-2 is situated at a distance of one kilometer from the acquired land. Further, the evidence of P.Ws.4 and 5 reveals that they have purchased the land near to the acquired land on square yard basis. The market value of the acquired land is more than Rs.60,000/- per acre as on the date of issuance of the notification. Keeping the same in view, the fixation of the market value for the acquired land by the lower Court at Rs.60,000/- per acre is just and reasonable and we find no merit in the appeal calling for interference by this Court. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY _____________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 3rd June 2010 dr