Dismissed

Vudumula Venkayamma v. Special Tahsildar

Telangana HC3 Dec 2014AS/1690/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed appeals filed by land claimants challenging a compensation award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Holding the valuation of Rs.2,90,400 per acre reasonable due to a negligible 21-day difference in acquisition notifications between subject and comparable lands, the Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it.

What did the court decide?

The appeals and the miscellaneous petitions pending therein are dismissed with no order as to costs.

Vudumula Venkayamma Vs Special Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY AND HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO

¶2

APPEAL SUIT Nos.670, 671, 715, 789, 880 and 1690 of 2003

¶3

COMMON JUDGMENT : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy)

¶4

These appeals, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are filed by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the common order and decrees dated 12.12.2002 in L.A.O.P.Nos.425, 422, 427, 423, 424 and 426 of 1987 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, whereby compensation for the subject lands was enhanced from Rs.96,800/- to Rs.2,90,400/- per acre, along with all statutory benefits.

¶5

2. Originally, Sri G. Dharma Rao, learned counsel, has filed vakalat on behalf of the appellants/claimants in these appeals. In view of his unfortunate demise during the pendency of the appeals, Sri I. Ravindra Babu, learned counsel, who is on Vakalat and attached to the office of late G. Dharma Rao, was heard.

¶6

3. A total extent of Acs.20.31 cents of land situated at Nallapadu Village, Guntur Mandal and District, belonging to the appellants/claimants was acquired for the purpose of conversion of Meter Gage Railway Line into Broad Gage Railway Line between Guntur and Macherla. A draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act) was published in A.P. Gazette dated 15.10.1984. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting necessary enquiry and after referring as many as 11 sale transactions, has passed Award No.25/87, dated 27.3.1987, categorizing the lands into two

¶7

categories and fixed market value at Rs.1,21,000/- per acre for the lands covered by Sy.Nos.192/1A, 192/1B1, 195/2, 193 and 196/B2 and at Rs.96,800/- per acre for the other lands.

¶8

4. Not satisfied with the same, the appellants/claimants sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, which were tried in L.A.O.P.Nos.425, 422, 427, 423, 424 and 426 of 1987 by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur.

¶9

5. Before the reference Court, on behalf of the appellants/claimants, P.Ws.1 to 16 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.9 were marked. On behalf of the referring officer, a Senior Assistant in the office of the R.D.O., was examined as R.W.1 and Ex.B.1 copy of Award dated 27.3.1987 was marked. The reference Court, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, mainly relying on Ex.A.8, certified copy of the judgment dated 5.1.2000 in A.S.Nos.1260, 1588 and 1592 of 1997 and 556 of 1998 passed by this Court, has answered the reference, fixing market value for the subject lands at Rs.60/- per square yard, which works out to Rs.2,90,400/- per acre, along with all statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the claimants have preferred these appeals claiming compensation at Rs.100/per square yard.

¶10

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the impugned common order and the material on record.

¶11

7. It is to be noticed that though the appellants/claimants are claiming compensation at Rs.100/- per square yard, the Notification for acquisition of the subject lands was published on 15.10.1984, whereas the Notification for acquisition of the lands covered by Ex.A.8 was issued on 24.9.1984, which is about 21 days prior to the date of Notification issued for acquisition of the subject lands, for which, this Court fixed market value at

¶12

Rs.2,90,400/- per acre. Therefore, when the time gap between the Notification issued for acquisition of the lands covered by Ex.A.8 and the Notification issued for acquisition of the subject lands is only 21 days, fixation of market value for the subject lands at Rs.2,90,400/- per acre by the reference Court is just and reasonable and the impugned order requires no interference.

¶13

8. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any merit in these appeals and accordingly they are dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in these appeals shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶14

____________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶15

__________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE B. SIVA SANKARA RAO 03.12.2014. Msr

¶16

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY AND HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO

¶17

APPEAL SUIT Nos.670, 671, 715, 789, 880 and 1690 of 2003

¶18

03.12.2014

¶19

Msr

Vudumula Venkayamma v. Special Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vudumula Venkayamma v. Special Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Land Acquisition Officer Vs M. Ramayyamma

Uppala Akkamamba Vs The Land Acquisition Officer

The Special Deputy Collector (L.a.O.) Vs Pasula Chinna Siva Reddy

Manyam Bhaskararao , Buli Bapanna Eg Dt. Vs Penumasta Subhadra and Another

Vudumula Venkata Reddy Vs Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)

Inturi Anjireddy (died) Vs Special Tahsildar