Partly allowed

Sanna Ramulu, v. The Land Acquisition Officer/Special Deputy

Telangana HC12 Nov 2014LAAS/1043/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that a small extent sale deed validly reflects market value for a larger land block allowing 1/3rd deduction. It enhanced market value to Rs.335/-, awarded 10% annual damages for illegal possession, and directed interest on solatium from the date of the Sunoer judgment.

What did the court decide?

Market value enhanced to Rs.335 per square yard; damages at 10% per annum on compensation from date of dispossession to notification; interest on solatium from judgment date.

Sanna Ramulu, Vs The Land Acquisition Officer/Special… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

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

¶2

L.A.A.S.No.1043 of 2005

¶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 31.12.2004 in O.P.No.228 of 1997 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, confirming the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer for the subject land at Rs.275/- per square yard along with all statutory benefits.

¶5

2. An extent of Ac.1.28 guntas of land, out of total extent of Acs.3.31 guntas, in Sy.No.94 of Kompally Village, Qutbullapur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, belonging to the appellants/claimants was acquired for the purpose of laying inter ring road from Kompally to Bollaram Villages. A draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) was issued on 25.3.1994 and possession of the land was taken on 1.9.1993. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting necessary enquiry, passed Award dated 13.3.1997, fixing market value for the subject land at Rs.275/- per square yard.

¶6

3. Not satisfied with the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer, the appellants/claimants sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, which was tried in L.A.O.P.No.228 of 1997 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District.

¶7

4. Before the reference Court, in support of their claim for compensation of Rs.1,300/- per square yard, the 1^st claimant himself was examined as C.W.1 and marked Exs.A.1 and A.2. On behalf of the referring officer, R.W.1 was examined and Ex.B.1 copy of the Award dated 13.3.1997 was marked. The reference Court, having considered the oral and documentary evidence on record, has passed the impugned order dated 31.12.2004, holding that the compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is just and reasonable. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the claimants.

¶8

5. During the pendency of the appeal, an application in A.S.M.P.No.977 of 2014 is filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of C.P.C., seeking to grant leave to the appellants/claimants to file certified copy of the registered sale deed bearing Document No.4766/1993, dated 15.7.1993 and receive the same as additional evidence. This Court allowed the petition and the said document was marked as Ex.A.3. Under the said document, an extent of 54 square yards of land in Sy.No.94/A, situated at Kompally Village was sold for a consideration of Rs.500/- per square yard.

¶9

6. It is contended by Sri K. Goverdhana Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants that though the subject land is situated in a developed area and suitable for house sites and the market value of the land during the relevant period of issuing Notification for acquisition of the subject land was not less than Rs.500/- per square yard, the reference Court has confirmed the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.275/- per square yard. It is further

¶10

contended that under Ex.A.3, in the very same survey number, the land was sold for a consideration of Rs.500/- per square yard on 15.7.1993 and, as such, the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation.

¶11

7. On the other hand, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader for Appeals that the land sold under Ex.A.3, certified copy of sale deed dated 15.7.1993, is only an extent of 54 square yards and, as such, the said document cannot be taken as an exemplar for the purpose of fixing compensation for the subject land, which is about Ac.1.28 guntas. It is further contended that having regard to the evidence on record, the reference Court has rightly confirmed the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.275/- per square yard and hence there are no grounds to interfere with the impugned order passed by the reference Court.

¶12

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have perused the impugned order and the material on record, including Ex.B.1 copy of the Award dated 13.3.1997 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer.

¶13

9. It is to be noticed that, before passing the Award, the Land Acquisition Officer has collected the sale data relating to preceding three years to the date of Notification dated 25.3.1994 and at Sl.No.72, he has referred to the registered sale deed bearing Document No.4766/1993, dated 15.7.1993, under which, an extent of 54 square yards of land in Sy.No.94/A, situated at Kompally Village was sold for a consideration of Rs.500/- per square yard. However, the Land

¶14

Acquisition Officer has discarded such transaction on the ground that it relates to a small extent of land. There is no dispute with regard to the bonafides of such document and it is now well settled that even the exemplars of small extents of lands can be taken into consideration for the purpose of fixing market value of the larger extents of lands by giving suitable deductions. In that view of the matter, when the land in Sy.No.94/A of the same village was sold for a consideration of Rs.500/- per square yard, we are of the view that there is no reason in discarding such document for the purpose of fixing market value for the subject land. Having regard to the purpose for which the subject land was acquired and taking into consideration the exemplar under Ex.A.3, we are of the view that the market value for the subject land can be fixed by giving 1/3^rd deduction from the value of the land under Ex.A.3. If 1/3^rd is deducted from the value of the land at Rs.500/- per square yard as reflected under Ex.A.3, the appellants/claimants are entitled to the market value for the subject land at Rs.335/- per square yard.

¶15

10. Further, since the possession of land was taken on 1.9.1993 even prior to the draft Notification, which was published on 25.3.1994, in view of the judgments of the Apex

¶16

Court in R.L. JAIN (D) BY LRS. V. DDA AND OTHERS^[1] and TAHERA KHOTOON AND OTHERS v. R.D.O. AND OTHERS^[2] , the appellants/claimants are not entitled for any statutory benefits on the compensation amount for the period prior to issuance of Notification. However, in the said judgments, the Apex Court held that in a case where

¶17

possession was taken earlier to the Notification, the land owners are entitled for rent/damages upto 15% per annum on the compensation awarded, from the date of their dispossession till the date of issuance of preliminary notification. In that view of the matter, since the appellants/claimants were illegally dispossessed from the land as long back as on 1.9.1993 and thereby deprived of possession over the land unauthorisedly much prior to issuance of draft Notification, which was published on 25.3.1994, instead of directing them again for enquiry to ascertain the damages, we hold that the appellants/claimants are entitled for damages/rent at the rate of 10% per annum on the compensation of Rs.335/- per square yard for the period from the date of taking possession to the date of Notification i.e., from 1.9.1993 to 25.3.1994.

¶18

11. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed in part enhancing the market value for the subject land from Rs.275/to Rs.335/- per square yard along with all statutory benefits. The appellants/claimants are further entitled to damages at the rate of 10% per annum on the market value. So far as interest on solatium is concerned, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble

¶19

Apex Court in SUNDER v. UNION OF INDIA^[3] , the appellants/claimants are entitled for interest on solatium with effect from the date of the said judgment i.e., on 19.09.2001 till the date of payment of market value of the land at Rs.335/- per square yard. No order as to costs.

¶20

12. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶21

____________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY

¶22

________________________________ JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA 12.11.2014. Msr

¶23

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

¶24

L.A.A.S.No.1043 of 2005

¶25

12.11.2014 Msr