Dismissed

The Land Acquisition Officer/ v. Nandibatla Laxmanaarsamma

Telangana HC3 Feb 2014AS/1255/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal by the Land Acquisition Officer challenging the Reference Court's enhanced compensation award for land acquisition aimed at providing house sites to needy persons, finding the enhancement reasonable based on evidence.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; interim order dated 01.10.2002 vacated; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

The Land Acquisition Officer/ Vs Nandibatla Laxmanaarsamma — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA

¶2

APPEAL SUIT No.1255 OF 2002

¶3

JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Subhash Reddy)

¶4

This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’), is filed aggrieved by the order, dated 18.04.2002, passed in O.P.No.62 of 1997 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda.

¶5

An extent of Ac.1-20 guntas of land belonging to the respondent – claimant in Kampasagar Village, Thripuraram Mandal, was acquired under the provisions of the Act for the purpose of providing house sites to needy persons. Notification under Section

¶6

4 (1) of the Act was published on 11.09.1994 and the Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting enquiry, passed an award on 30.06.1996 fixing the compensation for the land acquired at Rs.18,000/- per acre, as against the claim of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. Not satisfied with the same, the respondent – claimant sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, which was tried in O.P.No.62 of 1997 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda.

¶7

Before the reference Court, on behalf of the

¶8

respondent – claimant, PWs.1 and 2 were examined and Exs.A1 to A4 were marked. On behalf of the Referring Officer, no oral evidence was adduced, but Ex.C1 was marked.

¶9

The reference Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, by the impugned order, dated 18.04.2002, has enhanced the compensation from Rs.18,000/- per acre to Rs.40,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the same, this appeal is filed by the Land Acquisition Officer.

¶10

It is contended by the learned Government Pleader appearing for appellant that the reference Court, without recording valid reasons and without any evidence in respect of the claim of the respondent that the market value for the land under acquisition was Rs.40,000/- per acre during the relevant point of time, has enhanced the compensation from Rs.18,000/- per acre to Rs.40,000/per acre.

¶11

The respondent - claimant was examined as PW.1. In her deposition, she has stated that as per the Basic Value Certificates under Exs.A1 and A2, she is entitled to compensation at Rs.500/- per Square Yard.

¶12

The other witness examined on behalf of the

¶13

respondent - claimant is PW.2, whose lands were situated in Thripuraram Village, which is adjacent to Kampasagar Village, and which were also acquired for providing house sites to weaker sections. The reference Court has fixed the market value for the said lands at Rs.90,000/- per acre vide orders in O.P.No.27 of 1992, marked as Ex.A3.

¶14

Ex.A4 is the copy of the order passed by the reference Court in O.P.No.2 of 1995, dated 17.01.2001, by which, for the lands acquired in the year 1991 in Kampasagar Village for expansion of R & B road from Thripuraram to Kukkadam, the reference Court has fixed the compensation at Rs.45,000/- per acre.

¶15

In this case, it is to be noticed that the lands covered under Ex.A4 were acquired in the year 1991 and the compensation was fixed at Rs.45,000/- per acre. Further, it is to be noticed that under Ex.A3, for the lands acquired in the adjoining Village, the reference Court has fixed the compensation at Rs.90,000/- per acre, as against which, of course, it is stated that an appeal is pending before this Court. If the oral and documentary evidence on record is taken into consideration, it is clear that the market value for the lands in Kampasagar Village is more than Rs.45,000/- per acre, even about three to four years earlier to the date of present notification.

¶16

As it is not in dispute that the land acquired is being used for the purpose of providing house sites to the needy persons and in view of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the compensation fixed by the reference Court at Rs.40,000/- per acre cannot be said to be either illegal or arbitrary. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in this appeal, so as to interfere with the impugned order passed by the reference Court.

¶17

Accordingly, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. Interim order, dated 01.10.2002, passed in C.M.P.No.18448 of 2002, shall stand vacated. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed. No costs.

¶18

____________________________ JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY

¶19

JUSTICE A. SHANKAR

¶20

NARAYANA

¶21

03^rd February, 2014 MD

¶22

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA

¶23

APPEAL SUIT No.1255 OF 2002

¶24

(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy)

¶25

3^rd February, 2014

¶26

The Land Acquisition Officer/ v. Nandibatla Laxmanaarsamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Land Acquisition Officer/ v. Nandibatla Laxmanaarsamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Revenue Divisional Officer, (L.a.O.) Vs Kathuri Nand Kumar

The Special Deputy Collector, Vs Mahaboob Ali

The La Officer, Vs M. Gocershan

The General Manager Vs Namsani Chandraiah

The Revenue Divisional Officer Vs Ch. Shesh Rao

Thigireddy Sivarami Reddy Vs The Special Deputy Collector/(La) - Reh.