Telangana High Court
Korivi Ragaiah vs The Revenue Divisionsal Officer on 4 April, 2025
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
APPEAL SUIT NO.1772 OF 2004
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble Smt. Justice Tirumala Devi Eada)
This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894, (for short 'the Act') is preferred by the appellants - claimants,
aggrieved by the order and decree dated 13.12.2000 passed in
O.P.No.39 of 1997 by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Nalgonda
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court').
2. For convenience and clarity, the parties herein are referred to
as they were arrayed before the reference Court.
3. The facts of the case in brief are that the Mandal Revenue
Officer has identified the land of the claimants as suitable for the
allotment of house sites, from 155 beneficiaries and accordingly, the
proposal was submitted to the Government. The draft notification
under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in the gazette on
07.03.1996. After conducting due enquiry, the Land Acquisition
Officer has awarded Rs.11,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said
award, the appellants have made an application under Section 18 of
the Act, which was referred to the learned Senior Civil Judge,
Nalgonda.
AKS,J & ETD,J
AS No.1772_2004
4. The reference Court has framed the following points for
determination:
"1. Whether the claimants are entitled for fixation of the
market value to the acquired land @ Rs.3,00,000/- per
acre?
2. Whether the market value to the acquired land is
required to be enhanced over and above the market
value fixed by the LAO?
3 To what relief?"
5. Before the reference Court, the claimants got examined PWs 1
to 6 and got marked Exs.A1 to A4 and X1. On behalf of the
respondent, no evidence was adduced.
6. Based on the evidence on record, the reference Court has
enhanced the compensation to Rs.18,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by
the same, the claimants have preferred the present appeal.
7. Heard the submissions Sri G.Dhananjai, learned counsel for
the appellants and learned Government Pleader for the respondent.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the
reference Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record and
that the notification was issued for the purpose of house sites and
therefore, the Court must have fixed the market value at least
Rs.50/- to Rs.60/- per square yard and that the reference Court
has granted meager compensation and he further argued that the
AKS,J & ETD,J
AS No.1772_2004
adjacent lands are being sold on yardage basis for house sites. He
therefore, prayed to set aside the orders of the reference Court and
enhance the compensation.
9. The learned Government Pleader has argued that the orders
passed by the reference Court do not need any interference and that
in fact the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded a just
compensation and the reference Court has enhanced further to
Rs.18,000/- per acre which needs no further enhancement, he
therefore, prayed to dismiss the appeal.
10. Based on the above rival contentions, this Court frames the
following points for determination:
1. Whether the claimants are entitled for enhancement of
compensation?
2. Whether the order and decree of the reference Court
need any interference?
3. To what relief?
11. POINT NO.1:
a) A perusal of Ex.A1 sale deed dated 16.02.1995 shows that the
land to an extent of 73 ½ square yards was sold @ Rs.30/- per
square yard i.e. total consideration is Rs.2,300/-. Ex.A2 is sale
deed dated 20.02.1995 shows that the land to an extent of 174
Sq.yards was sold @ Rs.30/- per square yard i.e. total consideration
is Rs.5,300/-.
AKS,J & ETD,J
AS No.1772_2004
b) A perusal of the award reflects that at Sl.No.52 dated
30.05.1995 the highest sale transaction discloses a price of
Rs.10,000/- per acre and at Sl.No.37 dated 23.11.1994,
Rs.10,085/- is the price per acre.
c) The evidence of PWs 1 to 6 reveals that the lands in adjacent
area are sold for house sites @ Rs.50/- to Rs.60/- per square yard
and that their acquired land is very much useful for house sites.
PW5 is an attestor in Ex.A3, wherein an area of 125 sq.yards was
sold @ Rs.25/- per square yard.
d) Ex.A4 is the sale deed wherein 65 square yards was sold
@Rs.25/- per square yard and is attested by PW6. Ex.X1 is the
original sale deed wherein Ac.0-01 gunta land was purchased by
PW3 @ Rs.25/- per square yard. PW2 is the attestor of Ex.A1.
e) On a perusal of the schedule mentioned in Exs.A1 to A4 and
X1, it is elicited that the said sale transactions pertaining to house
plots is in the middle of the village and they are surrounded by
house plots and roads. The acquired land is not located in the
middle of the village. Thus, the sale transactions under the said
exhibits were not considered by the reference Court which appears
to be well justified. Admittedly, the acquired land is situated in the
peripheral area of the village. The transactions under the sale
deeds are not reflected in the sale statistics collected by the Land
AKS,J & ETD,J
AS No.1772_2004
Acquisition Officer. Though the land is not situated in the middle of
the village and is located in the outskirts but still, it is borne out by
record that the land does not require any leveling work and is
suitable for house sites. The Land Acquisition Officer in his award
has stated that the acquired land is naturally leveled with the
approach road and it is near the existing colony having water facility
and that it is convenient for location of houses. Though, he has
discussed the suitability of the lands for house sites, he has not
considered the potentiality of the land in a proper perspective and
has fixed the market value to be Rs.11,000/-.
f) The reference Court considering all these factors expressed by
the Land Acquisition Officer in the award, has enhanced the
compensation from Rs.11,000/- to Rs.18,000/- per acre. Hence,
the said order appears to be just and reasonable.
g) Though the appellants counsel has argued that the sale deeds
have to be considered, the said sale transactions are not reflected in
the sales statistics referred to by the Land Acquisition Officer and
the location of the properties mentioned in the said sale deeds also
shows that they pertain to the middle of the village, hence, the same
cannot be considered while fixing the compensation in this case.
Therefore, it is opined that the order and decree passed by the
AKS,J & ETD,J
AS No.1772_2004
Tribunal is based on sound reasoning and hence, the same is
upheld. Point No.1 is answered accordingly.
12. POINT NO.2:
In view of the reasoned finding arrived at Point No.1, this
Court holds that the order and decree of the reference Court do not
need any interference.
13. POINT NO.3:
In the result, the appeal is dismissed upholding the order and
decree dated 13.12.2000 passed in O.P.No.39 of 1997 by the
learned Senior Civil Judge at Nalgonda. No costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J
___________________________
TIRUMALA DEVI EADA, J
Date: 04.04.2025
ns
