THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR A.S.Nos.758 and 2388 of 1999 Common Judgment (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) Since these two appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) by claimant Nos.3 to 7 and claimant No.1 respectively, arise out of the very same order, dated 22.10.1998, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam in L.A.O.P.No.94 of 1993, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment. An extent of Acs.16.90 cents of land situated in Chilkalapudi Village, Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District was acquired for providing house sites to the members of Machilipatnam N.G.G.Os House Building and C.C Society. Draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 03.01.1980 followed by draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 21.02.1980. Possession of the land was taken on 16.06.1980. The Land Acquisition Officer, after following the due procedure, passed Award No.4/86, dated 23.09.1986, fixing the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.12.37 ps. per square yard. The compensation amount was directed to be deposited into the Civil Court, to which a reference will be made under Section 30 of the Act, as there was a dispute with regard to the title. At that stage, some of the land owners filed W.P.Nos.15350, 15495 and 16837 of 1986, wherein the N.G.G.Os House Building Society, which was arrayed as respondent No.4, agreed to pay the compensation as per the prevailing market value as on 27.10.1986, but not with reference to the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. In view of the consensus of the parties for deletion of 1975 square yards, this Court disposed of the said writ petitions by common order, dated 30.11.1987, directing the Land Acquisition Officer to determine the compensation amount with reference to the date 27.10.1986. On disposal of the said writ petitions, the Land Acquisition Officer passed Supplementary Award No.1/92, dated 02.09.1992, fixing the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.21.76 ps. per square yard, as against the claim of the claimants @ Rs.300/- per square yard. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the claimants sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act for due determination of the market value of the acquired lands. Accordingly, the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter to the Civil Court and the said reference was numbered as O.P.No.94 of 1993. During the pendency of the O.P., claimant No.2 died, and therefore, his legal representatives were brought on record as claimants 3 to 7 as per order dated 12.09.1998 in I.A.No.124 of 1998. Claimant Nos.1 and 2 filed claim statements. Claimant Nos.3,6 and 7 filed separate claim statements. Claimant Nos.4 and 5 filed adoption memo adopting the claim statement of claimant No.2. To substantiate the market value of the acquired land, on behalf of the claimants, the younger brother of claimant No.1 was examined as P.W.1 and examined five more witnesses as P.Ws.2 to 6 and got marked Exs.A.1 to A.17. On behalf of the Referring Officer, R.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.B.1 to B.4 were marked. The reference Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties, discarded Exs.A.8 to A.11 on the ground that the persons connected to the said documents were not examined. Ex.A.6 is the registration extract of sale deed dated 14.03.1985, where the land situated on the right side of Collector’s bungalow was sold @ Rs.25/- per square yard, whereas the acquired land is situated on the backside of the Collector’s bungalow. The reference Court refused to take the sale transaction under Ex.A.6 as comparable sale, since a suggestion was given to P.W.6 that the land covered by the said document is better land than the acquired land. The reference Court also refused to take note of the transactions, which took place after 16.06.1980, and therefore, Exs.A.1 to A.7 are not helpful to the claimants to show the true market value. Accordingly, the reference Court confirmed the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer holding that the claimants are not entitled to any higher compensation. Assailing the correctness of the said findings recorded by the reference Court, the present appeals have been filed by the claimants restricting their claims for enhancement @ Rs.50/- and Rs.76/- per square yard respectively. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and also the learned Government Pleader for Appeals, who have taken us through the evidence adduced by the parties. P.W.1 deposed that the acquired land is situated in Ward No.20 of Machilipatnam Municipality, which consists of 36 Wards and expanded in 28 square K.ms. The Municipal area extends upto 3 K.ms beyond the acquired land on its northern side and eastern side. On southern side, there is Collector’s Office. On the western side there is Z.P. Office and other residential area. On all four sides there are roads. Since the acquired land is on eastern side of Machilipatnam Town, as per Vasthu Sastra also the acquired land is more valuable land. On the southern side, there is Collector’s Office, Civil Supplies Office, Social Welfare Department, D.T.O. Office, R&B Office, R&B Guest House, Nehru Bala Bhavan, Chilkalapudi Post, Telegraphic Office and Chilkalapudi Police Station. On the eastern side after Kennedy road, Panduranga Municipal High School, which is situated just opposite to the acquired land and Collector’s bungalow, N.C.C. Office, St.Francis High School, I.T.Office and Cosmopolitan Club are situated. On the northern side, circar thota, residential area, S.B.I colony and municipal market are situated. On the western side Z.P guest house, Z.P Office and Gandhinagar residential area are situated. R.T.C buses are plying for every 10 minutes through the acquired land. Industrial area and Autonagar are situated within a distance of one k.m from the acquired land. Except the acquired land there is no other big plot available nearby vicinity for construction of houses. From 1977 cyclone there is steep increase in the value of the land in the locality and the acquired land is used as a helipad for the visit of V.I.P officials. P.Ws.2 to 4 deposed that the acquired land has all amenities for construction houses; that it has road facility on all four sides; that there is electricity, water and telephone facilities nearby the acquired land and roads were also formed. P.W.2 deposed that he purchased an extent of 150 square yards of land situated in Ward No.20 under Ex.A.1 on 29.12.1983 @ Rs.30/- per square yard. In the cross examination, he deposed that the land purchased by him under Ex.A.1 is situated on the backside of the Collector’s Office. He also deposed that the distance between the acquired land and the land covered by Ex.A.1 is 50 yards. He further deposed that he purchased the land under Ex.A.1 @ Rs.50/- per square yard, but for the registration purpose it was registered @ Rs.30/- per square yard. P.W.3, who signed as an attestor on the original of Ex.A.5, deposed that one Vijaya Shankar has purchased 168 square yards of site from Ramamohana Rao @ Rs.81/- per square yard. The said land is situated in R.S.No.378/1 called as Venkanna Thota. In the cross- examination he deposed that he does not know the purchasers of the land covered by Ex.A.5 and it is far away from Collector’s bungalow. He denied the suggestion that the value mentioned under Ex.A.5 is higher than the prevailing market value of the land acquired. The lower Court discarded Ex.A.5 only on the ground that the vendor or the vendee of the said document has not been examined to show the consideration under the said document. P.W.3 admitted that he does not know the purchasers of the land covered by Ex.A.5. P.W.4, who is the Councillor of 22nd Ward of Machilipatnam Municipality, deposed that he along with his maternal uncle and grandmother jointly sold away 57 square yards of land situated in Ward No.19 on 07.08.1985 @ Rs.557/- per square yard to one Vemuri China Koteswara, under Ex.A.7. Ex.A.7 was also discarded by the lower Court on the ground that P.W.4 admitted that the land under the said document was purchased for construction of a shopping complex and therefore, it will not reflect true market value of the land. P.W.5 deposed that he sold away 200 square yards of land in R.S.No.378/1 situated in Ward No.20 of Machilipatnam Municipality to one K.Vijaya Sankar under Ex.A.4. Ex.A.3 is the registration extract of sale deed dated 17.10.1984 under which he sold away an extent of 74 ½ square yards to one K.Srinivas, who is the brother of Vijaya Sankar. He has delivered possession of the said land on 17.10.1984. Ex.A.3 was discarded by the Court below on the ground that the agreement of sale was not produced before the Court showing that a sum of Rs.2,660/- was paid at the time of registration of the document. Similarly, Ex.A.4 was also discarded on the ground that though it shows that entire consideration of Rs.10,380/- was paid, but the said document was obtained for Rs.30,380/-. P.W.6 deposed that his brother purchased 133 square yards of land under Ex.A.6 @ Rs.60/- per square yard on 14.03.1985. He also deposed that he attested Ex.A.6. In the cross-examination, he deposed that the distance between the acquired land and the land covered by Ex.A.6 is 100 yards. He further deposed that the said land is situated in Ward No.21, but not in Ward No.20, where the acquired land is situated. The lower Court discarded Exs.A.1 to A.11 on the ground that the transaction took place after 16.16.1980 may not reflect true market value of the land. But, the same is contrary to the directions issued by this Court under Ex.A.13-certified copy of the order in W.P.Nos.15350, 15495 and 16837 of 1986, dated 30.11.1987, wherein it has been categorically stated that the market value of the acquired land has to be assessed as on the date agreed by the parties i.e., 27.10.1986, but not on the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. It is fairly well settled that without examining the vendor or the vendee, the sale deeds can be relied on for fixing the market value of the land acquired, as held by the Supreme Court in Cement Corporation of India v. Parga & others[1]. Since the evidence is inconsistent, the reasoning adopted by the lower Court for excluding Exs.A.3 and A.4 needs no interference. But Exs.A.1, A.2 and A.5 to A.11 can be taken into consideration for fixation of the market value since they are prior to the agreed date. Under Ex.A.11, an extent of 50 square yards of land was sold @ Rs.30/- per square yard. Under Ex.A.5, an extent of 168 square yards of site was sold @ Rs.81/- per square yard. To prove the sale consideration under Ex.A.5, P.W.3 was examined. Under Ex.A.7, an extent of 57 square yards of land was sold @ Rs.557/- per square yard. In view of the same, the market value of the acquired land can safely be fixed @ Rs.60/- per square yard. After giving 1/3rd deduction, the claimants are entitled to Rs.40/- per square yard for the acquired land. We, accordingly, fix the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.40/- per square yard. The claimants are also entitled to all statutory benefits. The appeals are accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J __________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J Date: 24.09.2002 va [1] 200(8) SCC 270