Partly allowed

R. Ksrishnadf Reddy v. The Land Acquisition Offaicer / Mro

Telangana HC10 Nov 2014LAAS/52/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the court enhanced compensation for acquired agricultural land. The court fixed the market value at Rs. 10,000 per acre, allowing statutory benefits and interest under the 1984 Amendment from September 19, 2001.

What did the court decide?

Compensation fixed at Rs. 10,000 per acre; statutory benefits and interest awarded from 19.09.2001.

R. Ksrishnadf Reddy Vs The Land Acquisition Offaicer / Mro — 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.52 of 2007

¶3

JUDGMENT : (Per Justice R. Subhash Reddy)

¶4

This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is filed by the claimant, seeking enhancement of compensation, aggrieved by the order and decree dated 28.01.2000, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool in O.P.No.15 of 1992.

¶5

Land to an extent of Ac.2-50 cents, belonging to the claimant and situated in Sy.No.331 of Inole village in Mahabubnagar District, was acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for the purpose of providing house sites to weaker sections. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published in the Gazette on 28.02.1991. The Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting necessary inquiry, has passed the Award, fixing compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per acre. Not satisfied with the compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer, on the representation of claimant under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the matter was referred to the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Nagarkurnool and numbered as O.P.No.15 of 1992.

¶6

Before the reference Court, the claimant himself was

¶7

examined as PW.1 and Ex.A-1 was marked on his behalf. On behalf of the referring officer, RW-1 was examined and the copy of the Award was marked as Ex.B-1.

¶8

The reference Court, having considered the oral and documentary evidence on record, has fixed the compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per acre. Seeking fixation of compensation at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per acre, this appeal is filed by the claimant.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for appellant and the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent.

¶10

It is submitted by the learned counsel for appellant that the acquired land of claimant is abutting the village and that it is red soil land which was being used for raising commercial crops like chilly, groundnut, cotton, castor etc., and the claimant used to get a net annual income of Rs.6,000/- per acre out of the said land. It is further submitted that earlier, with regard to acquisition of land from the same village, when the matter was referred to the Court, the reference Court, under Ex.A-1/order dated 08.04.1993 in O.P.No.28 of 1997, has fixed the compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per acre. It is also stated that Inole village is a developed village and there are Post office and High School in the village. Accordingly, he claims for fixation of compensation at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per acre for the acquired land.

¶11

On the other hand, it is contended by the learned Government Pleader that in the absence of any comparable sales filed on behalf of claimant, he is not entitled for any enhancement in compensation. It is submitted that the lands covered under Ex.A-1 relate to the acquisition through the notification issued subsequent to the present notification, as such, the same cannot be relied on for the purpose of fixing market value for the present land.

¶12

At the outset, it is to be noticed that the land acquired is in an agency area, where there is prohibition on transfers. It is submitted by the learned counsel for appellant that in view of such prohibition, there was no transfer of agricultural lands, as such, the claimant could not get any evidence by way of registered sale deeds, to prove the market value of present land. The claimant, who was examined as PW-1, in clear terns, has stated that the acquired land is adjoining the village and is fertile land, being used for raising commercial crops like groundnut, chilly, cotton etc., and he used to get a net annual income of Rs.6,000/- per acre. Having regard to the oral evidence on record, it is clear that the present acquired land is near to the village site and was being used for raising commercial crops like chilly, groundnut etc. If not Rs.6,000/- per acre as claimed by the claimant, even if the net income of Rs.1,000/- per acre is taken and capitalisation method is adopted by applying the standard

¶13

multiplier of 10, the appellant is entitled to compensation of Rs.10,000/- per acre. Having regard to the oral evidence on record and considering the fertility of acquired land and its location near to the village, we are of the view that the market rate for the acquired land can be fixed at Rs.10,000/- per acre.

¶14

For the aforesaid reasons, we allow this appeal in part and fix the market value for the acquired land at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per acre. It is needless to observe that as the notification for acquisition was issued on 28.02.1991, the appellant/claimant is entitled to statutory benefits as per the provisions of Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (Act 68 of 1984). The appellant is also entitled to interest on solatium only from 19.09.2001 onwards, on which date, the judgment in Sunder v. Union

¶15

of India^[1] was pronounced.

¶16

Appeal is allowed in part, to the extent indicated above. No order as to costs.

¶17

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶18

______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶19

__________________________ A.SHANKAR NARAYANA, J

¶20

10^th November 2014