Vs. Lao-Cum-Mandal Revenue Officer, Parti Rangareddy District  INSC 437 (22 March 1996)
K.Ramaswamy, K.G.B. Pattanaik (J)
1996 SCALE (3)683
APPEAL NO. 6952-53 & 6948-51 OF 1996 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 14686-87,
and 16244-47 of 1994)
O R D
under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the 'Act') was
published on August 29,1989 acquiring an extent of 9 acres 25 guntas of land in
Pargi Town, Ranga Reddy District in the State of Andhra Pradesh for public
purpose, namely, to provide house sites to the weaker sections. Possession of
the land was taken on June
5, 1986 pursuant to an
earlier notification which had lapsed for failure to pass the award. The Land
Acquisition Officer in his award dated May 25, 1990 determined the compensation
@ Rs.7500/- per acre in respect of some lands and Rs.15,000/- per acre in
respect of other lands and in addition granted Rs.5,000/- for well. On reference
under Section 18, the Subordinate Judge Vikarabad in his award and decree dated
February 12, 1992 determined the compensation a Rs. 36/- per sq. yd. He
determined the value of the well at Rs. 18,100/- Both the State as well as the
claimants filed appeals in the High Court. In three different sets of appeals
the different Division Benches followed the judgment of a learned single Judge
of that Court in Ex.A-2 in which Rs.11/- per sq.yd. was determined as
compensation after deductions and the same was proportionately increased to
Rs.22/- per sq.yd. due to time lag. Accordingly appeals of the State were
allowed and that of the claimants were dismissed in A.S. Nos.2030/92 & A.S.
No. 2597.>92 dated 8.9.93 and another judgment in A.S.No. 2024/92, 2028/92,
1662 & 1663/93 & A.S. Nos.2029/92 dated 16.9.93. Thus these appeals by
R. Venugopal Reddy, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants
contended that the reasoning adopted by the Division Benches of the High Court
is not correct in law. According to the learned counsel, the lands covered in
the judgments under Ex.A-3 Ex.A-4 and Ex. A-5, in addition to Ex.A-2 also offer
comparable basis for determination of the compensation The notifications
therein were issued during period from 1976 to 1982. The different higher rates
of compensation have been granted by the High Court in the appeals, The
Division Bench, therefore, was not right in relying upon Ex.A-2 along as a
basis and reducing the compensation to Rs.22/- per sq.yd. he has placed before
us the site plan marked in the case as Ex.A-1. From a perusal of the site plan,
it is seen that the lands bearing survey No. 18 is adjacent to the lands
bearing Survey Nos.24,/2 which are the subject matter of the acquisition under
Ex.A-2. The notification under Ex.A was dated 13.4.1979. A learned single Judge
of the high Court after taking into consideration the situation of the lands
and the development, reduced the compensation to 50% of the compensation
towards developmental charges and determined the compensation at Rs.11/- per sq.yd.
that order has become final. Therefore, the Division Bench has rightly placed
reliance upon that judgment and in view of the time lag between the date of the
notification under Ex.A-2 and the date of the notification in these cases has
proportionately increased the compensation and fixed the market value at the
rate of Rs.22/- per sq.yd after due deductions The lands under Ex.A-3 and
Ex.A-4 are situated far away from the lands covered in Survey No. 18.
Therefore, the High Court was right in not placing reliance on those judgments.
Therefore, we find that there is no justification for further increase in
respect of the lands covered in first set of appeals. But with regard to the
lands in Survey No. 271/2, 272/2 and 276/2, we find that there is no
justification in awarding the same compensation at Rs.22/- per square yard. It
is seen that these lands are situated on the main road and in developed area.
Though Mr. R. Venugopal Reddy, the learned senior counsel repeatedly placed
reliance on the judgments of the courts in relation to Ex.A-3 and Ex.A-4, we do
not find that they do offer any comparable basis to determine the compensation.
But one important factor to be taken note of is that the Land Acquisition
Officer himself made a distinction between the lands covered in Survey Nos. 18
& 20. While granting compensation @ Rs.7500/-, he had granted double the
rate to these lands, namely, Rs.15,000/- per acre. In other words, he had taken
the potential value of these lands into consideration. It is seen that though
there was not much development except partial development in the neighborhood,
these lands having been situated on the main road and abutting the developed
area, on the facts and circumstances, we think that there should be a uniform
rate of Rs.30/- per sq.yd.
the appeals and S.L.P.(C) Nos. 14244-14245 & 14686-14687/94 are dismissed
and appeals and S.L.P.(C) Nos.16244-16247/94 are allowed and the market value
is determined at Rs.30/- sq.yd. in respect of all the lands.
claimants are entitled to the benefits under Sections 28, 23(2) and 23(1-A) of
the Act of the enhanced solatium, interest and additional amount @ 9% p.a. for
one year and @ 15% p.a. thereafter, from the date of taking possession till date
of the award. No costs.