THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI RAJA ELANGO A.S.No.290 of 2002 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) has been preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer/Mandal Revenue Officer, Vemulapally questioning the enhancement of compensation made by the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda in O.P.No.42 of 1997 dated 26.07.2001. An extent of Acs.7.29 guntas of dry land comprised in Survey Nos.1, 2, 3, 58, 180 and 181 of Koyalapadu Village of Vemulapally Mandal, Nalgonda District was acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections, by issuing a draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 22.08.1994, followed by draft declaration on 29.08.1994. The Land Acquisition Officer, after completing due formalities and obtaining sale statistics of preceding three years, passed an award on 20.08.1996 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.11,500/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the claimants sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act for due determination of the compensation payable for the land acquired. On such reference being made, the claimants appeared before the reference Court and filed claim statement claiming compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre, whereas, the Land Acquisition Officer filed a memo adopting the award proceedings as counter. In order to substantiate the market value of the acquired land, on behalf of the claimants, claimant No.2 was examined as P.W.1 and Exs.A.1 to A.3 were marked. On behalf of the Referring Officer, The Mandal Revenue Officer examined himself as R.W.1 and got marked Award Proceedings dated 22.08.1996 as Ex.B.1. The reference Court, considering the entire material available on record, held that the lands covered by Exs.A.1 to A.3 are situated in Chirumarthy Village and that the distance between Chirumarthy and Koyalapadu is about 7 K.M., as stated by R.W.1 and that since under Ex.A.1 certified copy of the order and decree dated 12.02.1986 in O.P.No.2 of 1984 on the file of Subordinate Judge Court, Suryapet, for the lands acquired in Chirumarthy Village, by issuing draft notification on 22.12.1982, the compensation was fixed at Rs.40,000/- per acre, which has been confirmed by this Court under Ex.A.2-certified copy of the order and decree dated 11.12.1989 in A.S.No.347 of 1987, if escalation is added at 10%, the market value comes to Rs.1,22,681/- per acre, and accordingly fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.40,000/- per acre. Questioning the same, the present appeal has been filed. The learned Government Pleader for Appeals contended that the Land Acquisition Officer relied upon the sale deeds at Sl.Nos.9 to 11, where an extent of Acs.1.29 guntas, Acs.1.10 guntas and Acs.1.10 guntas respectively situated in Survey No.58 and 181 of the same village i.e., Koyalapadu Village, were sold between Rs.7,000/- and Rs.7,040/- per acre on 27.12.1991, and after giving due escalation for the time lag of 32 months, fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.11,500/- per acre. He further contended that in the absence of any evidence adduced by the claimants that the sale deeds of the same village are not available, the reference Court committed an error in taking into consideration Ex.A.1, since the land covered by the said document is situated in a different village and is 7 K.Ms away from the present acquired land. Therefore, the same cannot form basis for fixation of the market value. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants contended that the claimants used to raise commercial crops in the acquired land and get an income of Rs.8,000/- per acre and even if escalation is added at 10% they are entitled to Rs.80,000/- per acre, but the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.40,000/- per acre only and the same needs no interference. In the light of the above, the point that arises for consideration is what is the true market value for which the claimants are entitled? It is well settled that when the sale deeds of the same village are available, the same have to be taken into consideration while fixing the market value. The sale deeds referred to by the Land Acquisition Officer at Sl.Nos.9 to 11 in his award proceedings were not filed either by the claimant or by the Land Acquisition Officer to substantiate the market value of the acquired land. But the fact remains that the claimants themselves in the written statement filed by them before the Land Acquisition Officer stated that they have no objection for acquisition of Acs.7.72½ guntas of land for providing house sites to weaker sections; that there are no wells, constructions or trees in the acquired land; that the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is very less and the market value prevailing at that time was Rs.40,000/- to Rs.50,000/- per acre, but they have not filed any documents to substantiate the same; and they requested to pay the entire compensation at a time. During the course of evidence, when a suggestion was put to the Mandal Revenue Officer (R.W.1) that originally there was a proposal to acquire an extent of Acs.9.17 guntas belonging to the claimants and that some purchasers made representation to the Joint Collector, Nalgonda that a part of the land was already purchased by them at Rs.40,000/- per acre under simple sale deeds and they being small farmers requested to delete and after deletion the present extent of the land was acquired, he denied the said suggestion. The learned trial Judge curiously taken into consideration the suggestion that the land value was Rs.40,000/- per acre as a basis for fixation of the market value and the said procedure is unknown for fixation of the market value. It is for the claimants to establish the market value relevant by adducing evidence, but no sale deeds were marked except the previous awards made by the Civil Court with reference to different village, which is 6 to 7 K.Ms away from the present village. Claimant No.2, who was examined as P.W.1 stated that Thipparthy Mandal Head Quarters is 6 K.Ms away from their village and that the acquired lands were being cultivated with commercial crops like groundnut, red gram, green gram etc., and used to get Rs.8,000/- per acre per annum after deductions, but they have not stated about the source of water. When they have filed a written statement before the Land Acquisition Officer stating that there are no wells or structures in the acquired land, it is not known as to how they have raised ground nut crop in the said land, since it is only a rain fed crop and it is highly impossible to get Rs.8,000/- per acre by raising ground nut and red gram at the time of acquisition. Conservatively, if we take Rs.3,000/- per acre towards net income after deducting all the expenses and multiply it by “10”, the market value comes to Rs.30,000/- per acre, but not more than that. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.30,000/- per acre, keeping in view the rise in prices of the agricultural land, and since the acquired land is situated 6 K.Ms away from Mandal Head Quarters. Accordingly, we allow the appeal and fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.30,000/- per acre. It is needless to observe that the claimants are entitled to all statutory benefits as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India[1]. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ________________ RAJA ELANGO, J Dt.08.06.2010 va [1] AIR 2001 SC 3516