Dismissed

The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Cy.Collector v. G. Venkateshwar Reddy and 2 Others

Telangana HC7 Nov 2024LAAS/469/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appeal was found to be covered by a Division Bench common judgment dated 01.10.2013. Following that judgment, the appeal was dismissed without any order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed following the common judgment in L.A.A.S.No.331 of 2011. No order as to costs.

The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Cy.Collector Vs… — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[3413 ]

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

¶8

L.A.A.S. NO: 469 OF 2011

¶9

Appeal under Section 54 of L.A. Act, 1894 against the^{Order and Decree} dated 17 -02-2009 made in O.P. No. 512 of 2008 on^{the file of the Court of the Senior} Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.

¶10

Between:

¶11

The Land Acquisition Officer & Special Dy. Collector,^{L.A. Unit, PJP Gadwal}

¶12

...Appellant / Referring Officer

¶13

AND

¶14

G. Venkateshwar Reddy, S/o. Bal Reddy, Age^{44 yrs}

¶15

G. Yella Reddy (Died), S/o. Bal Reddy, Age^{42 yrs}

¶16

Occ: , Both are R/o. Janumpally Village, Pebbair^Mandal

¶17

G. Shanthi, Wo. Late G. Yella Reddy, 35^{years,Occ. Agril, R/o. Janumpally} Village of Pebbair Mandal

¶18

( LR No. 3 added as per orders in lA.No. 559/08 24.10.2008 )

¶19

...ResPondents / Claimants

¶20

l.A. NO: I OF 2012(LAASMP . NO: 205 OF 20121

¶21

Petition under Section^'151 CPC^praying thatⁱⁿ the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{HighCourt may be pleasedto} grant stay of all further proceedings and the Decree and Judgment dl.^{17 -O2-} 2009 in OP No. 512 of 2O0B on the file of^{Senior CivilJudge,Wanaparthy} pending disposal of the above Appeal.

¶22

'^{Counsel for the} Appellant : GP for Appeals Counsel for the Respondents : Sri S Venkateshwar Reddy

¶23

The Court delivered the following Judgment:

¶24

THE HON,BLE SRI^{JUSTICE ABHINANDKUMAR SHAVILT} AND THE HON,BLE^{SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANAALISHETTY}

¶25

L.A.A.S.No.469^{OF 2011}

¶26

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble Si Justice^{Abhinairl KumarShauiti)}

¶27

When the matter is^{taken up for hearing, itis} noticed that the issue^{raised in the present Appeal is} squarely covered^{by the common judgment,dated} O1.10.2013,^{passed by the Division Benchof this Court} in L.A.A.S.No.33^{1 of 20 11 and batch. Following these} orders, another^{Division Bench of this Court also} dismissed similar^{appeals in L.A.A.S.No.341 of 2011and} batch uide common^{judgment, dated 16'08'2022'} Therefore, following^{the aforesaidcommonjudgment, the} present Appeal is also^{liable to be dismissed'}

¶28

Accordingly, the^{Appeal is dismissedfollowing the} aforesaid common^{judgment, dated O1'10'2O13, passed} by the Division^{Bench of this Court in L'A'A'S'No'33 1 of} 2O11 and batch.^{Thereshall be no order as to costs'}

¶29

)

¶30

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

¶31

Appeal shall stand closed.

¶32

Sd/- K. SRI VASA RAO JOINT EGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

SE ON OFFICER

To,

'1. The Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy (with records, if any)

¶37

' Iy;"?"Bl"r33f^{t for Appeals, High court for the state of retansana,}

¶38

One CC to Sri S Venkateshwar Reddy, Advocate tOpUCI

¶39

Two CD Copies

¶40

ftL'T#:t!J,:rt'r'J 3,f:r93Ti"on^{Judsment dated 01-10-2013} in L A A s

VA/gh

HIGH COURT

DATED:0711112024

JUDGMENT + DECREE

LAAS.No.469 of 2011

(2 DRAFTS )

Ir:<br>1T 2 7 Jttt ?ffi iJ))
*=./

¶49

DISMISSING THE LAAS
,kr
\ V

¶50

¶51

¶52

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIOU

¶53

L.A.A.S.Nos.331. 337. 339 AND 371 of 2011

¶54

COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble SriJustice Ashulosh Mohunta)

¶55

Since common question of fact has arisen for consideration in these appeals, they are being disposed of through common judgment.

¶56

The Land Acquisition Otficer and Special Deputy Collector (LAO), L.A., Srisailam Project now PJP, Gadwal, filed these appeals aggrieved by the order, daled 24.02.2010, in various O.Ps.^passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy, whereby the compensation fixed by the LAO was enhanced to Rs.1,36,400/- per acre for irrigated dry lands and Rs.'l ,20,900/- per acre for dry lands.

¶57

The LAO issued a draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') on 08.09.2004 and acquired the lands situated in Janampet Village of Pebbair Mandal for the purpose of excavalion and forming embankmenl of NTR canal under PJP. The LAO vide his order, dated 24.03.2005, awarded compensalion as under:

¶58

i) Hs.42,000/- per acre for wet lands ii) Rs.36,000/-^per acre lor irrigated dry lands iii) Rs.34,500/-^per acre lor dry lands

¶59

Being dissatisfied with the order passed by the LAO, the land owners filed applications under Section 18 of the Act lor referring the matter to the Court. Before the Reference Court, the land owners placed reliance on Ex.Pl, which is a copy of the judgment, dated 26.11 .2006, passed by this Court in A.S.No.258 of 2004, wherein the

¶60

lands situated in Chelimilla Village were awarded compensation at Rs.78,0001 per acre for dry lands and Rs.gg,OOOl per acre for wel lands. Notification for acquisition of lands in Chelimilla Village was issued on 28.12.1998. The Reference Court, by giving an enhancement of 10% per annum for a period ol S1/2 yearc, enhanced the market value of the lands in the present case to Rs_1,36,400/- per acre for weyirrigated dry lands and Rs.l ,20,900/- per acre for dry lands along with all the statutory benefits under the Act.

¶61

Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Reference Court, the^present appeals are filed by the LAO.

¶62

Learned counsel for the State contended that the lands in the present case are situated at Janampet Village, whereas the lands in Ex.P'l are situated in Chelimilla Village, which are far away lrom each other. He further contended that the land owners oughl to have placed reliance on sale deeds ofJanampet Village as that would have depicted the correct market value at the time of acquisition of the lands.

¶63

We have perused the order passed by the Reference Court and found that as per the evidence of pws.1 and 2 together with Exs.p2 and P3, the lands of Chelimilla Village are adiacenl to Janampet Village. A perusal of the village map of Janampet, which has been marked as Ex.P3, also shows that the boundaries of Chelimilla Village touch the boundaries ofJanampet Village. Thus, the lands in both the villages are adjacent to each other. Therefore, the Reference Court has rightly placed reliance on Ex_p1, which is the copy of the.iudgment in A.S.No.258 of 2004. The lands in the present case were acquired on 08.09.2004, whereas the lands, which were the subject matter of acquisition under Ex.P1, were acquired on 2g.12.199g. Therelore, an appreciation at 1 07" per annum lor a period of 5/z years has also been rightly given by the Reference Court. Accordingly, we uphold the compensation as determined by the Reference Court finding no enor

¶64

in lhe order passed by it. Apart from the aforesaid compensation, the claimants shall also be entitled to interest

¶65

at 9% per annum lor the first year from the date of possession and at 15% per annum for the subsequent years. The claimants shall also be entitled to the additional market value al 121" per annum. The land owners shall also be entitled to the solatium at 3070 per annum on the land value.

¶66

These appeals are disposed ol in the above terms. There shall be no order as to cosls.

¶67

The Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, filed in these appeals shall stand closed.

¶68

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.

¶69

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶70

01 .10.2013 KH

¶71

134131

¶72

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶73

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶74

PRESENT

¶75

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

¶76

L.A.A.S. NO: 469 OF 2011

¶77

Between:

¶78

The Land Acquisition Officer & Special Dy. Collector, L.A. Unit, PJP Gadwal

¶79

...Appellant / Referring Officer

¶80

AND

¶81

G. Venkateshwar Reddy, S/o. Bal Reddy, Age 44 yrs

¶82

G. Yella Reddy (Died), S/o. Bal Reddy, Age 42 yrs

¶83

Occ: , Both are R/o. Janumpally Village, Pebbair Mandal

¶84

G. Shanthi, Wo. Late G. Yella Reddy, 35 years, Occ. Agril, R/o. Janumpally Village of Pebbair Mandal

¶85

( LR No. 3 added as per orders in lA.No. 559/08 24.10.2008 )

¶86

...Respondents / Claimants

¶87

Appeal under Section 54 of L.A. Act, 1894 against the Order and Decree dated 17 -O2-2O09 made in O.P. No. 512 of 2008 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy.

¶88

ORDER:

¶89

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of GP for Appeals, Advocate for the Appellant and of Sri S Venkateshwar Reddy, Advocate for the Respondents.

¶90

This Court doth Order and decree as follows:l That the LAAS be and hereby is dismissed following the aforesaid common Judgment dated 0'l-10-2013 made in L.A.A.S. No. 331 , 337, 339 & 371 of 2O11; and 2. Thal there be no order as to costs in this appeal;

¶91

Sd/. K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// sEpTtoN oFFtCER To, 1 . The Senior Civil Judge, Wanaparthy (with records, if any) 2. fwo CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:0711112024

DECREE

LAAS.No.469 o12011

DISMISSING THE LAAS