Sri M.Janardhan Reddy vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1119 Tel

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
                         AND
          THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.LAXMAN

      LAND ACQ UISITION APPEAL SUIT No.489 OF 2012

JUDGMENT:      (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice M.Laxman)


1.    This appeal assails the order and decree dated 02.07.2012

in L.A.O.P.No.604 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the I

Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar

(for short, reference Court), wherein and whereby the market

value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer was enhanced from

Rs.80,000/- per acre to Rs.2,00,000/- per acre for the acquired

lands belonging to the appellants herein in addition to granting

of other statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(for short, the Act).


2.    The   appellants      herein     are    the   claimants   and   the

respondent herein is the respondent in L.A.O.P.No.604 of 2006.

For the sake of convenience, the parties hereinafter are referred

to as they are arrayed in the said LAOP.

3. The sum and substance of the case of the claimants is that

they are the owners of lands to an extent of Ac.3-00 guntas and

3700 square yards in Sy.Nos.18, 26, 28 and 29, situated at

Immamguda Village, Maheshwaram Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District. The Government acquired the said lands for the

purpose of laying approach road to Hardware Park undertook by

A.P.I.I.C. Limited. A notification was issued on 30.04.2005 and

possession of the lands was taken on 15.06.2005 by invoking

the urgency clause. After award enquiry, the Land Acquisition

Officer has passed an Award dated 08.08.2005 fixing the market

value @ Rs.80,000/- per acre, apart from granting other

consequential benefits. Dissatisfied with the same, the

claimants sought reference under Section 18 of the Act for

enhancement of compensation from Rs.80,000/- per acre to

Rs.3,000/- per square yard. Such reference was numbered as

L.A.O.P.No.604 of 2006.

4. In the reference Court, the claimants to support their

case, examined P.Ws.1 to 6 and relied upon Exs.A-1 to A-18.

The respondent, to support its case, examined R.W.1 and relied

upon Ex.B-1.

5. The reference Court, appreciating the evidence on record,

has enhanced the compensation from Rs.80,000/- per acre to

Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the said enhancement,

the appellants filed the present appeal for enhancement of

compensation.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants/claimants has

contended that the Land Acquisition Officer as well as the

reference Court have failed to consider the prevailing market

value in the locality and also failed to consider the genuine

transactions either reflected in the Award or placed before the

reference Court. Without considering such evidence, the market

value was enhanced to Rs.2,00,000/- per acre, which is meager.

He has also contended that the acquired lands are abutting to

the State Highway leading from Hyderabad to Srisailam and they

have various potential values. The area where the subject lands

are situated is covered by various industries on account of

development of the area by the A.P.I.I.C. Limited and there was a

great demand for the residential plots. Before acquisition, the

appellants made a layout over the subject lands, and in fact,

there are several transactions under Exs.A-12 to A-18 which

pertain to part of subject lands. Lastly, he has contended that

the reference Court has ignored Ex.A-4, sale deed, which is

anterior to the notification and also ignored Ex.A-6, sale deed

pertaining to larger extent which was sold for Rs.28,00,000/- per

acre. Though the lands covered under Ex.A-6 are situated in a

different village, the transaction was done immediately after the

present notification was issued. Therefore, the appellants are

entitled for fixation of market value not less than Rs.3,000/- per

square yard.

7. Learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition,

representing the State, has contended that the lands covered by

Exs.A-1 to A-3, which the appellants have purchased and

converted into house plots, were purchased for Rs.3,00,000/-

per acre in the year 2004 and the present acquisition is of the

year 2005. Therefore, after giving escalation, the said

documents can be the basis to enhance the compensation. It is

also his contention that Exs.A-4, A-12 to A-18 are the created

documents in anticipation of acquisition proceedings. In fact,

there is no layout as pleaded by the appellants on the strength of

Ex.A-9. According to him, Ex.A-9, layout, was obtained from the

Gram Panchayat in the year 2003, whereas the lands under

Exs.A-1 to A-3 were purchased in the year 2004. If really the

plotting was done as claimed by the appellants, the link

documents under Exs.A-1 to A-3 should reflect as the plotted

area, however, such documents only show that they are the

agricultural lands. This evidence clearly establishes that Ex.A-9

is created on the strength of some challan available for the year

2003. It is also submitted that under Ex.A-5, the A.P.I.I.C.

Limited sold an extent of land admeasuring Ac.4-06 guntas to

the various industries @ Rs.2,000/- per square yard, after fully

developing the area. These documents establish that prevailing

market value in the locality was not higher than the amount

fixed by the reference Court.

8. A reading of the impugned order shows that the reference

Court has noted that in the Award of the Land Acquisition

Officer, it was clearly mentioned that the acquired lands are

abutting to State Highway and house sites were made without

any approved layout. As seen from Ex.B-1, copy of Award, the

Land Acquisition Officer has recorded the various sale

transactions prior to the notification. The sale transactions

referred at Sl.Nos.16, 17 and 19 in the Award relate to

documents under Exs.A-1 to A-3. In respect of the said sale

transactions, the Land Acquisition Officer has clearly recorded

that the lands are abutting to the State Highway leading from

Hyderabad to Srisailam. It is also recorded that entire lands

have been converted into house plots, but there are is approved

layout to those lands. Exs.A-1 to A-3 are the sale transactions

relating to the plotted area, which is under acquisition in the

present case. The said plotted area was purchased by the

appellants from the original land owners. Therefore, the subject

lands said to be are located abutting to the State Highway

leading from Hyderabad to Srisailam and they were converted

into house plots.

9. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant has relied upon

Ex.A-9 draft layout obtained from the Gram Panchayat and also

relied upon a challan which was paid in the year 2003 i.e., much

prior to the acquisition. Therefore, according to him, Exs.A-12

to A-18 are the sale transactions relating to house plots prior to

the acquisition of lands which the appellants purchased under

Exs.A-1 to A-3.

10. To counter the said claim, learned Government Pleader has

brought to the notice of this Court Exs.A-1 to A-3, the

transactions relating to July and November, 2004. After

purchasing the land under Exs.A-1 to A-3, the appellants have

converted the land into house sites without any approval. This

shows that these sale transactions clearly establish that if really

in 2003 there was approval of layout from the Gram Panchayat,

Exs.A-1 to A-3 should have reflected the sale transactions as

house plots, but they have sold the land in the form of

agricultural land.

11. As rightly contended by the learned Government Pleader,

Ex.A-9 shows that a challan was remitted in the year 2003 by

the original land owners. Exs.A-1 to A-3 show that the lands

sold under the said documents are agricultural lands and not

house plots. If really there was an approved layout for plots in

the year 2003 itself, definitely when the sales were made under

Exs.A-1 to A-3, the appellants could not have claimed the lands

as agricultural lands, but those documents clearly show that

they are agricultural lands. Further, when the layout is made by

the purchasers under Exs.A-1 to A-3, the question of payment of

necessary fee to the Gram Panchayat by the land owners having

sold the land to the appellants does not arise. These

circumstances go to show that layout was not obtained from the

Gram Panchayat, and it appears that it is a created one and

hence, reliance cannot be placed on Ex.A-9.

12. Further, the admission of the Land Acquisition Officer itself

shows that the acquired lands were already converted into house

plots, but without any approval. This means, the purchasers of

the lands i.e., the appellants have converted the agricultural

land into house plots without following proper procedure for

such conversion. Therefore, the claim set up by the appellants

to place reliance on Exs.A-12 to A-18 cannot be taken into

account. Exs.A-12 to A-18 show that under each document, the

extent of plotted area is 200 square yards and the sale

consideration was Rs.1,00,000/-. This means, the price per

square yard comes to Rs.500/-. Those documents appear to

have been brought in anticipating the acquisition proceedings.

Therefore, they cannot be taken into account in fixing the

market value.

13. Further, Ex.A-4 also cannot be believed for the reason that

it was sold out @ Rs.1,200/- per square yard and it was also

executed just before the acquisition of land i.e., notification was

dated 30.04.2005. The sale transaction is dated 25.04.2005.

The sale was made by the original patta holder, who sold the

land in favour of the appellants under Exs.A-1 to A-3. When the

appellants themselves sold the land treating it as agricultural

land, they cannot say that they sold the land by converting it as

plots. Therefore, such document cannot be relied upon. Ex.A-6,

sale deed, relating to the larger extent of area, which is of post-

notification i.e., the sale transaction is dated 28.12.2005. The

price mentioned in the said document is Rs.28,00,000/- per

acre. Under the said document, the total land sold was Ac.10-00

guntas situated at Sri Nagar Village. This is a post sale

notification and not from the same village. Therefore, this

document cannot also be taken into account.

14. Ex.A-5 is the sale transaction relating to the sales made by

A.P.I.I.C. Limited in the Hardware Park. After development of

the area, an extent of Ac.4-06 guntas was sold @ Rs.200/- per

square yard. By relying upon the said document, learned

Government Pleader has contended that when the developed

land itself was sold out @ Rs.200/- per square yard, the land

which is not developed cannot fetch more than it.

15. It must be noted that the land allocation in the developed

area of A.P.I.I.C. Limited was a concessional allocation to

promote the industries. Such a value mentioned cannot also

reflect the true market value. The potentiality in the present

case shows that by the time of acquisition of subject lands,

already A.P.I.I.C. Limited laid Hardware Park and the subject

lands were acquired for the purpose of providing way to the

Hardware Park. When the Hardware Park was established much

prior, definitely there would be appreciation in the price of the

surrounding area. Further, the subject lands are abutting to the

State Highway leading from Hyderabad to Srisailam. This is not

seriously in dispute. It is also to be noted that the land owners

i.e., the appellants, after purchasing the land, developed the

same by making the plots and the same is also not in dispute by

the Land Acquisition Officer in his Award enquiry and the same

was also noted by the reference Court.

16. The above facts cannot be ignored in fixing the market

value of the land. Though the appellants have not obtained

layout permission properly, the development which they have

made cannot be discarded. The sales statistics referred at

Sl.Nos.9 and 10 of the Award show that extents of lands

admeasuring Ac.0-09 guntas and Ac.0-11 guntas were sold for

Rs.5,55,555/- per acre and Rs.4,54,545/- per acre, respectively.

These lands were discarded for the simple reason that they are

abutting to the State Highway leading from Hyderabad to

Srisailam. Further, the sales statistics referred at Sl.No.8 of the

Award, statistical data reflects that an extent of land

admeasuring Ac.1-21 guntas was sold for Rs.9,61,000/- per

acre, which comes to Rs.6,30,000/- per acre. The said

document is of the year 2004 much prior to the acquisition

proceedings. This was also discarded for the reason that the said

land was abutting to Srisailam-Hyderabad State Highway. It

was located in the developed area covered by structures. The

Government itself sold the land of Ac.4-06 guntas @ Rs.200/-

per square yard and not on acerage basis. This circumstance

also cannot be ignored.

17. Considering the potentialities referred herein before, and

considering the sales statistics referred in the Award, this Court

feels that fixing of Rs.300/- per square yard would be the fair

market value for the lands acquired. According to the own

contention of the learned counsel for the appellants, 40% of the

area developed was left for amenities such as roads, parks, etc.,

though it is not an approved layout. As the appellants

themselves stated that 40% is left for amenities, the said extent

shall be given deduction after fixing the market value @ Rs.300/-

per square yard.

18. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed, as follows:

(i) The compensation amount is enhanced from Rs.2,00,000/- per acre to Rs.300/- per square yard in respect of the acquired land;

(ii) 40% shall be deducted towards developmental charges after fixing the market value @ Rs.300/- per square yard;

(iii) The appellants are also entitled for other consequential statutory benefits on the market value fixed so.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J

_______________ M.LAXMAN, J Date: 10.03.2022 TJMR