Partly allowed

G.S. william v. M.Ramuloo

Telangana HC27 Dec 2014AS/2696/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal in part, varying the market value of acquired land from Rs.13,272 to Rs.15,926 per acre. The Court applied a 20% escalation for the time gap between a relevant sale deed and the acquisition notification, upholding the reference court's decision to discard a second sale deed due to excessive price fluctuation within a short duration.

What did the court decide?

Allowed in part fixing market value at Rs.15,926/- per acre; appellants entitled to statutory benefits and interest on solatium from 19.09.2001.

G.S. william Vs M.Ramuloo — 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 No.2696 of 2001

¶3

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

¶4

This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is filed by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the order and decree dated 23.03.2001 in O.P.No.117 of 1999 (old O.P.No.114 of 1989 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam) passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam District.

¶5

2. An extent of Acs.2.77 cents of land situated at Kurmannapalem village, Gajuwaka Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, belonging to the appellants/claimants was acquired for the purpose of excavation of Raiwada link canal. A draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) was published in the Gazette on 30.3.1981. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting necessary enquiry, has passed Award No.13/84, dated 29.5.1984, fixing market value for the subject land at Rs.9,500/- per acre, along with all statutory benefits.

¶6

3. Not satisfied with the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer and also its apportionment, the claimants sought reference under Sections 18, 30 and 31 of the Act, which was tried in O.P.No.117 of 1999 by the

¶7

learned Senior Civil Judge, Gajuwaka.

¶8

4. Before the reference Court, on behalf of the claimants, P.Ws.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.5 were marked. On behalf of the referring Officer, R.W.1 was examined and Ex.B.1 Award dated 29.5.1984 was marked, apart from marking Exs.X.1 to X.3.

¶9

5. Enhancement of compensation was considered by the reference Court in issue No.2. The reference Court discarded all the documents relied upon by the claimants, except Exs.A.4 and A.5. Under Ex.A.4, registration extract of sale deed dated 24.8.1979, an extent of 389 square yards of land was sold for a consideration of Rs.1,600/-, which works out to Rs.19,907.45 ps per acre. Under Ex.A.5, registration extract of sale deed dated 3.3.1980, an extent of 299 square yards of land was sold for a consideration of Rs.4,500/-. The reference Court discarded Ex.A.5 on the ground that when compared to the value of the land covered by Ex.A.4, there was an increase by three fold for the lands covered by Ex.A.5, which was executed within a span of a year. Thus, relying on Ex.A.4, the reference Court arrived at the value of the subject land at Rs.19,907/- and after deducting 1/3^rd towards development charges, fixed market value for the subject land at Rs.13,272/- per acre, along with all statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is preferred by the claimants.

¶10

6. Sri M.S.R. Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for

¶11

the appellants/claimants contended that there is no reason for the reference Court to discard Ex.A.5, under which, an extent of 299 square yards of land was sold for a consideration of Rs.4,500/-. Another submission made by the learned counsel for claimants is that the sale transaction under Ex.A.4 is dated 24.8.1979, whereas the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act for acquisition of the subject land was published on 30.3.1981 and in view of the time gap of more than 1 ½ years and in view of the increasing trend in the prices of the land, no escalation is given while fixing market value for the subject land.

¶12

7. On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Appeals that in view of the reasons assigned by the reference Court, Ex.A.5 was not taken as an exemplar while fixing compensation for the subject land. It is submitted that even the sale transaction covered by Ex.A.4 relates to a small extent of land and hence the market value fixed by the reference Court for the subject land at Rs.13,272/- per acre is just and reasonable and there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order.

¶13

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

¶14

9. In this case, it is to be noticed that between the date of execution of Ex.A.4 on 24.8.1979 and the date of execution of Ex.A.5 on 3.3.1980 i.e., within a span of

¶15

hardly seven months, the value of land was increased by three-fold, as such, we are of the view that the reference Court has rightly not considered Ex.A.5 as an exemplar while fixing the market value for the subject land. So far as the sale transaction under Ex.A.4 is concerned, in view of the time gap of more than 1½ years between Ex.A.4 dated 24.8.1979 and the Notification dated 30.3.1981, and also in view of the increasing trend in the prices of the land, it is now fairly well settled that an escalation of 10% per annum is to be given while fixing market value of acquired land. Therefore, by taking the market value of the land covered by Ex.A.4 at Rs.19,907.45 ps, if an escalation of 20% is given for the time gap of more than 1 ½ years as stated above, the value of the subject land comes to Rs.23,889/-. Further, as the land covered by Ex.A.4 is a small extent, if 1/3^rd is deducted towards development of the area from the value of Rs.23,889/-, the market value for the subject land comes to Rs.15,926/per acre.

¶16

10. For the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is allowed in part fixing market value for the subject land at Rs.15,926/- per acre. It is needless to observe that the appellants/claimants are entitled to all the statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Act 68 of 1984). So far as interest on solatium is concerned, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court

¶17

in SUNDER v. UNION OF INDIA^[1] , the

¶18

appellants/claimants are entitled for interest on solatium with effect from the date of the said judgment i.e., 19.09.2001 till the date of payment of market value of the acquired land at Rs.15,926/- per acre. No order as to costs.

¶19

11. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this appeal shall stand closed.

¶20

____________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH

¶21

REDDY

¶22

___________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE B.SIVA SANKARA RAO 27.12.2014. Msr

¶23

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

¶24

APPEAL SUIT No.2696 of 2001