Telangana High Court
K. Gangadhar Rao vs The Land Acquisition Officer And ... on 25 July, 2024
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
LAAS.No.486 of 2008
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty) This Appeal is filed by claimant Nos.3 and 4 aggrieved by the order and decree dated 27.09.2007 passed in O.P.No.786 of 1998 on the file of the I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad (hereinafter referred to as "the Reference Court").
2. Heard Sri Sankalp Pissay, learned counsel representing Sri P.Panduranga Rao, learned counsel on record for the appellants, and the learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for respondent No.1. Perused the entire material available on record.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the Government acquired land to an extent of Acs.8.00 guntas in Sy.No.925, Ac.0.17 guntas in Sy.No.497 and Ac.0.23 ½ guntas in Sy.No.199, belonging to the claimants for the purpose of providing house sites to weaker sections of families of Navipet Village through draft notification vide Gazette Nos.86 and 87, dated 10.03.1994, and possession of the lands was AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 2 taken on 11.06.1995. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting enquiry, passed Award, dated 16.01.1996, awarding compensation @ Rs.12,000/- per acre for dry lands and @ Rs.22,000/- per acre for wet lands.
4. Dissatisfied with the said Award, the claimants filed Protest Petition and the Land Acquisition Officer referred the matter to the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for determination of just and reasonable compensation in respect of the acquired lands.
5. Before the Reference Court, on behalf of the appellants/ claimants, P.Ws.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-8 were marked. On behalf of the Reference Officer, R.W-1 was examined and Ex.B-1-Award was marked.
6. The Reference Court, based on the oral and documentary evidence on record, enhanced the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer from Rs.12,000/- per acre to Rs.56,334/- per acre for the acquired lands, vide the impugned order dated 27.09.2007. Aggrieved by the said order, the present Appeal is filed by claimant Nos.3 and 4.
AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 3
7. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contended that the acquired lands are situated in a Village which is Mandal Head Quarters and State High way connecting Maharashtra passes through the village; that the said Village is the main shopping centre and provides medical facility for more than 60 surrounding villages; that there is a railway line from Kachiguda to Manmad, however, the Reference Court has failed to take into consideration the aforesaid aspects and fixed meager market value for the acquired lands. He further contended that the Reference Court failed to take into account the judgment of the High Court vide AS.No.2505 of 1988, whereunder for the lands situated in the very same Village as that of the acquired lands, the compensation was fixed @ Rs.32,500/- per acre and therefore, seeks to enhance the market value of the acquired lands.
8. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Appeals contended that the Reference Court has rightly appreciated the oral and documentary evidence adduced before it and fixed the market value of the acquired lands and therefore, the same needs no interference by this Court.
AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 4
9. In the present case, perusal of the Award discloses that the Land Acquisition Officer has referred to as many as 150 sale transactions between 1991 and 1994 for fixing the market value of the acquired land and fixed the market value of the acquired land based on Ex.A-8-sale deed dated 05.08.1993, whereunder the highest market value was reflected. However, the property covered under Ex.A-8 is RCC roofed and Mangalore tiled roof house, whereas the acquired lands in the instant case are agricultural lands, therefore, the nature of the acquired lands and the land covered under Ex.A-8 are different. Therefore, the market value mentioned in Ex.A-8 cannot be taken as basis for fixing the market value of the acquired lands, as rightly held by the Reference Court in the impugned order.
10. Coming to the sale transactions under Exs.A-6 and A-7, which pertain to the years 1991 and 1992, respectively, the nature of the land covered by the said sale deeds is different from the acquired lands, i.e., those sale deeds were in respect of house sites. The acquired lands are agricultural lands. Therefore, market value of the lands mentioned in Exs.A-6 and A-7 is not comparable and cannot be taken as basis for fixing the market value of the acquired lands. The Reference Court has rightly declined to fix the market value of the acquired AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 5 lands basing on Exs.A-6 and A-7, which needs no interference by this Court.
11. Though the claimants relied upon Ex.A-3-Valuation Certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat, the same cannot be considered since it only reflects the notional value. The market valuation specified under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, for registration of sale deeds or agreements to sell, as the case may be, in the area where the land is situated can be taken into account for determination of market value. In other words, the Market Value Certificate issued by the Sub- Registrar's Office concerned has to be taken into consideration, but not the Valuation Certificate issued by the Panchayat which only reflects the notional value. As such, the market value of the acquired lands cannot be fixed on the basis of Ex.A-3.
12. The claimants have got marked certified copy of judgment rendered in O.P.No.438 of 1983 as Ex.A-1 and the certified copy of judgment rendered in A.S.No.2505 of 1988 as Ex.A-2. Admittedly, the nature of lands in the said judgments and the acquired lands in the present case is same and admittedly, both are situated in the same Village i.e., Navipet Village. The Reference Court in its judgment in AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 6 O.P.No.438 of 1983 has enhanced the market value of the acquired land therein to Rs.5/- per square yard and on appeal, vide AS.No.2505 of 1988, the High Court has further enhanced the market value to Rs.10/- per square yard and after deducting 1/3rd towards development charges, fixed @ Rs.32,500/- per acre.
13. In the instant case, the lands were acquired for non-agricultural purpose i.e., for providing house sites to weaker sections of society, which otherwise means that the acquired lands, though agricultural lands, have the potentiality to build houses thereon. However, the Land Acquisition Officer ignored the same and erred in fixing the market value of the acquired lands on acre basis.
14. In Ex.A-2-judgment, the High Court enhanced the rate of the acquired land therein to Rs.10/- per square yard and after deducting 1/3rd therefrom towards developmental charges, fixed the market value of the acquired lands therein @ Rs.32,500/- per acre. Since the village and the nature of lands covered under the said judgment and the acquired lands in the instant case are same, the market value reflected therein can be taken as basis for fixing the market value of the acquired lands. However, Ex.A-2-judgment was rendered with respect AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 7 of the lands acquired in the year 1978 and in the instant case, the lands were acquired in the year 1994 i.e., there is a gap of 16 years. Accordingly, escalation of the market value of the land needs to be calculated.
15. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in General Manager, ONGC Ltd Vs. Rameshbhai Jivanbhai Patel and another 1, dealt with the issue as to whether the escalation/increase of market value should be at a cumulative rate or a flat rate and at para 16 of the judgment held as under:-
"... It will thus be seen that even if the percentage of increase is constant, the application of a flat rate leads to different amounts being added depending upon the market value in the base year. On the other hand, the cumulative rate method will lead to consistency and more realistic results. Whether the base price is Rs 10 or Rs 12.10 or Rs 13.31, the increase will lead to the same result. The logical, practical and appropriate method is therefore to apply the increase cumulatively and not at a flat rate."
16. In the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rameshbhai Jivanbhai Patel's case (cited supra), the escalation of the market value has to be calculated cumulatively. But, the Reference 1 (2008) 14 SCC 745 AKS, J & LNA, J LAAS No.486 of 2008 8 Court erred in calculating escalation for the period of 16 years on flat rate and the same needs to be modified accordingly.
17. Applying the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the cumulative escalation @ 10% per annum has to be calculated for sixteen (16) years i.e., from the years 1978 to 1994, on Rs.32,500/- per acre, which comes to Rs.1,49,328/- per acre and after deducting 1/3rd therefrom towards developmental charges, it works out to Rs.99,552/- per acre.
18. Accordingly, this Appeal is allowed in part, enhancing the market value of the acquired lands from Rs.56,334/- per acre to Rs.99,552/- per acre. The remaining portion of the impugned order passed by the Reference Court remains unaltered. There shall be no order as to costs.
19. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any shall stand closed.
_______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J ___________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Dated:25.07.2024 dr