Dismissed

Lao and Rdo v. D.Venkat Swamy

Telangana HC4 Feb 2025AS/1125/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

LAO appealed against reference-court enhancement of compensation for lands in Yeddumailaram acquired for an Ordinance Factory. The appeal was dismissed following the Division Bench judgment in Appeal Suit No.833 of 2004 dated 19.04.2022, which had itself followed the common judgment in A.S.No.1081 of 1991.

What did the court decide?

Appeal Suit dismissed with no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications closed.

Lao and Rdo Vs D.Venkat Swamy — Land Acquisition | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁵¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF^FEBRUARY

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND^{TWENTY FIVE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND^{KUMAR SHAVILI} AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE^{TIRUMALADEVI EADA}

¶7

APPEAL SUIT No: 1125 ot 2004

¶8

Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of^{Land Acquisition Act againstthe} Judgment and Decree dated^{27-06-2001 passedin o.P.No.548 of '199'l on the file of} the Court of the I Additional^{DistrictJudge, Medak at Sangareddy.}

¶9

Between:

¶10

The Land Acquisition Officer-Cum-^{Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy.}

¶11

...AppellanURespondent

¶12

AND

¶13

Devnoor Venkat Swamy, S/o.Venkaiah

¶14

Manaiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶15

Krishna, S/o.Venkaiah

¶16

Devnoori Veeraiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶17

Borla Chandraiah, S/o.PaPaiah

¶18

Asiz Bee, W/oAbdul Gafoor

¶19

Pasha Miya, S/o Shaik lmam^{(diedper L.Rs C26 to 29)}

¶20

Gokam Durgaiah, S/o.Veeraiah

¶21

Balaraju, S/o.Veeraiah

¶22

1 0. Tenugu Chandraiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶23

1 1. Balakistaiah, S/o.Narsaiah Fl/o.Yeddumalaram^{Village, Medak Dist}

¶24

'l2.Tenugu Ramaiah, S/o.Yellaiah (Died per L.Rs C.49 to C.52)

¶25

13.Tenugu Veeraiah, S/o.^{Venkaiah (Died per L.Rs C.30 to C.32)}

¶26

Dodla Mallaiah, S/o bakkaiah^{(Diedper L.Rs C.41 to 44)}

¶27

Dodla Ramaiah, S/o^{Bakkaiah (Died perL.Rs C.33to 44)}

¶28

.^-;..'/

¶29

Dodla Venkaiah, S/o.Bakkaiah

¶30

Dodla Narayana, S/o Bakkaiah, (Died^{per L.Rs.C.45 to C.43)}

¶31

'18. Dodla Lingaiah, S/o.Bakkaiah

¶32

Begari Venkaiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶33

Ramaiah, s/o.Late Venkaiah^{(Diedper L.Rs C.38 and C.39)}

¶34

21 . Papaiah, S/o Venkaiah^{(Died per} L.Rs C.40)

¶35

Mokila Narsaiah, S/o.Buchaiah

¶36

Mokila Anthaiah, S/o.Narsaiah

¶37

Devenoori Venkaiah, S/o Mallaiah^{(Died per L.Rs C.1 to C.zl)}

¶38

lllitam Venkaiah, S/o.Mallaiah

¶39

Hasmath Bee, W/o.Pasha Miya

¶40

Mohd Basheer, S/o.Pasha^fViYa

¶41

tvlohd Hammed, S/o.Pasha Miya

¶42

Mohd Habeeb, S/o.Pasha Miya

¶43

Tenugu Mallamma, W/o.T.Veeraiah

¶44

3'1 . T.Gopal, S/o.T.Veeraiah

¶45

T.Venkaiah, S/o.T.Veeraiah

¶46

C.30 to C.32 were brought on record as LRs of^{C.13 as per I.A.No.1022 of} '1 991 dated 26-03-1992.

¶47

D.Rukkamma, W/o. Ramaiah

¶48

D.Sattaiah, S/o.Ramaiah

¶49

D.Shankaraiah, S/o.Ramaiah

¶50

D.Mallesham, S/o.Ramaiah

¶51

D.Srinivas, S/o.Ramaiah

¶52

(C.33 to C.37 were brought on record as L.Rs of C.15 as^per I.A.No.1019^of 91 dated 26-03-92)

¶53

Begari Venkatamma, Wo.Ramaiah

¶54

Begari Mallesha, S/o.Ramaiah

¶55

(C.38 and C.39 were brought on record as LRs of C.20 as^per LA^No.1021/91, dated 26-3-92)

¶56

Parvathamma, W/o.Begari Papaiah

¶57

(C.40 brought on record as L.Rs of C.21^{as per order in 1.A.1018/9'l dated26-} 3-e2)

¶58

41 . D.Laxmamma, W/o.D.tvlallaiah,^{Aged55 years}

¶59

D.Narsimulu, S/o.D.Mallaiah Aged^{40 years}

¶60

D.Kistaiah, S/o.D.Mallaiah Aged 38^years

¶61

D.Pentaiah, S/o.Mallaiah Aged 35^years

¶62

(C.1 to C.44 are LRs C.14 brought on record as^{per order per 1.4.623/93} dated 13-7-93)

¶63

Dodla Laxmamma, W/o.Narayana^{Aged 50 years}

¶64

D.Anthaiah, S/o.Narayana^{Aged 30 years}

¶65

D.Anjaiah, S/o.Narayana Aged^{26 years}

¶66

D.Yadaiah, S/o.Narayana^{Aged 25 years}

¶67

(C.45 to C.48 are L.Rs of C.17 brought on^{record as per order in 1.A.242196} dated 21-6-96)

¶68

49.Tenugu Sathyamma, Wo.Late^{Tenugu Ramaiah, 62 years}

¶69

50.Tenugu Anjaiah, S/o.Ramaiah^{Aged45 years}

¶70

51.Tenugu Narayana, S/o.Ramaiah^{Aged 43 years}

¶71

52.Tenugu Dharmaiah,^{S/o.T.Ramaiah, Aged 41 years}

¶72

(C.49 to C.52 were brought on record of^{L.Rsof C.12 as perl.A. 1962100'} dated 14-'t2-2000)

¶73

All are Residents of^{yeddumailaram village, Medak District.}

¶74

Rr.Nos.5,8,9,11 ,18,22,27,29,3O,35,37,41 ,47^{& 48 dismissed for default vide} cou( order dated 15-02-2011.

¶75

... Res^pon d e nts/C laim^a nts

¶76

Counsel for the Appellant:^{THE ADVOCATE GENERAL}

¶77

Counsel for the Respondents^No.8,11 ,22,38^{and 39: Ms. B.V. Aparna Lakshmi}

¶78

Counsel for the Respondent^{No.9: Sri RapoluBhaskar}

¶79

Counsel for the Respondents^{No.49 to 52: Sri K. Sudhakar}

¶80

The Court delivered the^{following: JUDGMENT}

¶81

¶82

TTIE HON'BLE^{SRI JUSTICE ABHINANDKUMAR SHAVILI} AND THE HON'BLE^{SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALADEV]- EADA}

¶83

AP al Suit No. LL2^{5 of 2OO4}

¶84

JUDGMENT^{i(Per llon'bl<'Si JusticeAbhttldnd KumorShauili)}

¶85

HeardlearnedAdvocateGeneral,appeairngfortheappellant' Ms.B.V.AparnaLakshmi,learnedcounselappearingfor respondent^{Nos.8, I 1,22,3aand 39, Sri RapoluBhaskar' learned} counsel appearing^{forrespondent No 9 and SriK'Sudhakar'} learned counsel^{appearingfor respondent Nos'49to 512}

¶86

When thc^{matteris taken up for hearing'learned Advocate} General,^{appearingfor the appellant has informed the Court that} the issue raised^{in the present appeal is squarelyclvered by the} judgment of this Court^ln Appeal Suit^{No.833 o2O04dated} t9.o4.2022.

¶87

3.Learnedcounselappearingfortherespondentl\os8'9'11'38' 39 and 49 to^{52 have not disputed aboutthe said facr'}

¶88

4 A perusal of^{the record disclosesthat Appeal lluit No'833 of} 2004 was dismissed^{by the Division Bench of t}'tis Court vide} Judgment dated^{19.O4.2O22 by followingthe ComreonJudgment} Suil No.1081^{of1991 and batch,dated} passed in APPeal t9.r2.1996.

¶89

AS 1125

¶90

¶91

In view of the above, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed by following the Judgment passed in Appeal Suit No.g33 of 2aO4 dated t9.O4.2022

¶92

6 Accordingly, the Appeal Suit is dismissed by following the Judgment passed 1n Appeal Suit No.833 ol 2OO4, dated 19 .O4 .2022. No costs.

¶93

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any in this Appeal Suit, shall stand closed.

SDI.^M DEAH-$'$?HXI

\ \

To,

SECNON^OFFICER

IIRUE^COPYII

edak^at Sanga

¶101

6,M cl

¶102

1.c The One^AdCC ditionato^TH I DistriE^ADV ct OCA.t^Judg EGELaksNERA.hmi vocate^Ad L vocateIOPUtoPUclto^PUCI to^{[t/ls.BV. Aparna} kar^Ad

¶103

3.4. One One^CCCC to^Sri RapoluK.^Sudha Bhaskar^, Advo cate [OPUC] to^Srt

¶104

6 One^CC D^CoPies in^{A,S'No833 of 2004)} t) rwo FI pY ot^{Judgment' daled19-04-2022'}

¶105

(Anne^{xed a Co}

kam

HIGH COURT

DATE D :04 10212025

JUDGMENT+DECREE AS.No.1125 of²⁰⁰⁴

¶110

S
rJ
(J 2 E J ut i)
.;: '/

oF,,\t;{l"!=-.-i {r,tr , lt,. 4 ti::r

¶111

DISMISSING^{OF THE} APPEAL SUIT (t--fr <- pqlatts

-.4,

THE IION'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU

¶116

APPEAL SUIT NO. 833 OF 2oo4

¶117

ORDER: (Pcr Hon'blc Sri Justice^p.Naveen Rao)

¶118

Heard Sri C.V. Bhaskar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents

¶119

The lands of respondents in Eddumailaram Village were acquired for estabhshing Ordinance Factory. The Land Acquisition Ofhcer (for short 'LAO) determined the compensation. Not satisfred with the compensation determined by the LAO, the land owners who are respondents herein, ar-rd several others sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984. The claim of respondents herein was mrmbered as O.P.No.554 of 199i on the file of I Additional District Judge, Medak, at Sangareddy. The said O.p., was heard and disposed of by a common order dated 27.06.200| in O.p.No.548 of L997 and batch. The reference Court granted enhancement of compensation at Rs. 1 1,000/ to all the lald owners. In addition to enhancement of compensation, the reference Court also held that^,,the claimants ore entitled, to 3Ot% solatium on the total enhanced- compen-sation amount, and. additional market ualue at 12% per annum from tLrc date of notification tilt the date o.7t possession, and interest ot 9%, per annum from the d_ate of

¶120

¶121

,.",.

¶122

possession /or one gear and at jS% per annum thereaft er till the date of paAment". Aggrieved by the orders of thc referencc Court, batch of appeals were preferred before this Court. A.S.No.l081 of 1991and batch was heard by the Division Bench of this Court and b.r common order dated 19.12.1996, all the appeals were dismissed l:y affirming the compensation determined by the reference Court.

¶123

Since the judgment of this Court in A.S.No.lcg1 of 1991 and batch arises out of the common order passed by the re^-erence Court in O.P.No.548 of 1991 and batch, including the O.p., 1 referred by the respondents herein i.e., O.P.No.554 of 1991, following r re said decision of this Court, the appeal suit is dismissed. Misceliarreous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶124

P. lrAvEEN RAO, J

¶125

19'IH APRIL, 2022 F.I

¶126

SAMBASIVI\RAO NAIDU, J

,: I

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMBASIVARAO NAIDU

¶131

APPEAL SUIT NO. 833 OF 2OO4

Date:l9.O4.2022

[³⁴⁴⁵ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶136

TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

¶137

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶138

PRESENT

¶139

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶140

APPEAL SUIT No: 1125 of 2004

¶141

Between:

¶142

The Land Acquisition Officer-Cum- Revenue Divisional Officer, Sangareddy.

¶143

...AppellanURespondent

¶144

AND

¶145

Devnoor Venkat Swamy, S/o.Venkaiah

¶146

Mahaiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶147

Krishna,S/o.Venkaiah

¶148

Devnoori Veeraiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶149

Borla Chandraiah, S/o.Papaiah

¶150

Asiz Bee, W/oAbdul Gafoor

¶151

Pasha Miya, S/o Shaik lmam (died per L.Rs C26 to 29)

¶152

Gokam Durgaiah, S/o.Veeraiah

¶153

Balaraju,S/o.Veeraiah

¶154

1 0. Tenugu Chandraiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶155

1 1. Balakistaiah, S/o.Narsaiah Rl/o.Yeddumalaram Village, Medak Dist

¶156

1 2. Tenugu Ramaiah, S/o.Yellaiah (Died per L.Rs C.49 to C.52)

¶157

1 3. Tenugu Veeraiah, S/o. Venkaiah (Died per L.Rs C.30 to C.32)

¶158

Dodla Mallaiah, S/o bakkaiah (Died per L.Rs C.41 to 44)

¶159

'15. Dodla Ramaiah, S/o Bakkaiah (Died per L.Rs C.33 to 44)

¶160

Dodla Venkaiah, S/o.Bakkaiah

¶161

jil

¶162

' 17.Dodla Narayana, S/o Bakkaiah, (Died per L.Rs. C.45 to C 48)

¶163

Dodla Lingaiah, S/o.Bakkaiah

¶164

Begari Venkaiah, S/o.Venkaiah

¶165

Ramaiah, s/o.Late Venkaiah (Died per L.Rs C.38 and C.39)

¶166

21 . Papaiah, S/o Venkaiah (Died per L.Rs C.40)

¶167

22.Mokila Narsaiah, S/o.Buchaiah

¶168

IMokila Anthaiah, S/o. Narsaiah

¶169

Devenoori Venkaiah, S/o Mallaiah (Died per L.Rs C.1 to C.4)

¶170

lllitam Venkaiah, S/o.Mallaiah

¶171

Hasmath Bee, W/o.Pasha Miya

¶172

Mohd Basheer, S/o.Pasha Miya

¶173

I\ilohd Hammed, S/o.Pasha lViya

¶174

29.Mohd Habeeb, S/o.Pasha lVliya

¶175

Tenugu Mallamma, W/o.T.Veeraiah

¶176

31 . T.Gopal, S/o.T.Veeraiah

¶177

T.Venkaiah, S/o.T.Veeraiah

¶178

D.Rukkamma, Wio.Ramaiah

¶179

D.Sattaiah, S/o. Ramaiah

¶180

D.Shankaraiah, S/o.Ramaiah

¶181

D.Mallesham, S/o.Ramaiah

¶182

D.Srinivas, S/o.Ramaiah

¶183

(C.33 to C.37 were brought on record as L.Rs of C.15 as per 1.A.No.1019 of 9l dated 26-03-92)

¶184

Begari Venkatamma, W/o. Ramaiah

¶185

Begari Mallesha, S/o.Ramaiah

¶186

(C.38 and C.39 were brought on record as LRs of C.20 as per 1.A.No.1021l91, dated 26-3-92)

¶187

Parvathamma, Wo.Begari Papaiah

¶188

(C.40 brought on record as L.Rs of C.21 as per order in l.A.'1018/91 dated 263-e2)

¶189

41 . D.Laxmamma, W/o.D.Mallaiah, Aged 55 years

¶190

D.Narsimulu, S/o.D.Mallaiah Aged 40 years

¶191

D.Kistaiah, S/o.D.Mallaiah Aged 38 years

¶192

D.Pentaiah, S/o.Mallaiah Aged 35 years

¶193

(C.41 to C.44 are LRs C.14 brought on record as per order per 1.4.623/93 dated 13-7-93)

¶194

Dodla Laxmamma, W/o.Narayana Aged 50 years

¶195

D.Anthaiah, S/o.Narayana Aged 30 years

¶196

D.Anjaiah, S/o.Narayana Aged 26 years

¶197

D.Yadaiah, S/o.Narayana Aged 25 years

¶198

(C.45 to C.4B are L.Rs of C.17 brought on record as per order in 1.A.242196 dated 2'1-6-96)

¶199

49.Tenugu Sathyamma, W/o.Late Tenugu Ramaiah, 62 years

¶200

50.Tenugu Anjaiah, S/o.Ramaiah Aged 45 years

¶201

51.Tenugu Namyana, Sio,Ramaiah Aged 43 years

¶202

52.Tenugu Dharmaiah, S/o.T.Ramaiah, Aged 4l years

¶203

(C.49 to C.52 were brought on record of L.Rs of C.12 as per I.A. 1962100, dated 14-12-2000)

¶204

All are Residents of yeddumailaram village, Medak District.

¶205

...Respondents/Claimants

¶206

Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act against the Judgment and Decree dated 27-06-2001 passed in O.P.No.S4B of 1991 on the file of the Court of the Additional District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy.

¶207

This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Court below and the material papers in the case and upon hearing the arguments of THE ADVOCATE GENERAL for the appellant and of Ms. B.V. Apama Lakshmi, Counsel for the Respondents No.8,11,22,38 & 39 and Sri Rapolu Bhaskar, Advocate for the Respondent No.9 and Sri K. Sudhakar, Advocate for the Respondents No.49 to 52.

¶208

is Court doth Order and Decree as follows:

¶209