APHC010290112016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 455.458.462.466 & 475 OF 2016 LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 455 OF 2016 Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.300/2012 dt.10-2-2016 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector (LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Appellant AND N Linga Murthy Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy, aged 20 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent lA NO: 2 OF 2016 fLAASMP 1268 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceeding in O.P No.300/12 dt.10.02.2016 on the file of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. 4 — s Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. BALLA RAVINDRANATH &Smt. K. SAVITHRI DEVI APHC010164582016 QMS 0SS LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 458 OF 2016 Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.285/2012 dt.10-2-2016. Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector(LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Appellant AND N Linga Reddy, S/o. Sanjeeva Reddy, aged 30 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent lA NO: 2 OF 2016(LAASMP 1271 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceeding sin O.P No.285/12 dt.10.02.2016 on the file of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. BALLA RAVINDRANATH & Smt. K. SAVITHRI DEVI ft. 3 % APHC010222382016 LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 462 OF 2016 Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.299/2012 dt.10-2-2016. Between: The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector (LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Appellant AND P Eswara Reddy, S/o. Nagi Reddy, aged about 48 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent lA NO: 2 OF 2016 fLAASMP 1280 OF 20161 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in the O.P No.299/12 dt.10.02.2016 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. BALLA RAVINDRANATH & Smt K. SAVITHRI DEVI 6APHC010906232016 LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 466 OF 2016 Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.286/2012 dt.10-2-2016. Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector (LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Appellant AND P Sankar Reddy, S/o. Subba Reddy, aged 33 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent lA NO: 2 OF 2016fLAASMP 1288 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in the O.P No.286/12 dt.10.12.2016 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool Dt. Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. BALLA RAVINDRANATH & Smt. K. SAVITHRI DEVI V—- -- APHC010598902016 LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 475 OF 2016 Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.330/2012 dt.10-2-2016. Between: The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Coilector(LA, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal. ...Appellant AND K Konda Reddy, S/o Sanjeeva Reddy, aged 60 years, R/o Mandaluru Village Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent lA NO: 2 OF 2016 (LAASMP 1304 OF 2016 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased grant stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the order and decree passed in OP No.330/2012 dated 10.02.2016 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. BALLA RAVINDRANATH & Smt. K. SAVITHRI DEVI The Court made the following : 1 NJSJ&TRRfJ LAAS_455_2016 & batch APHC010742722015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3526] THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT Nos: 455. ASS AK? 466 and 475 of 2016 LAAS No.455 of 2016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. AND N.Linga Murthy Reddy, S/o.Rami Reddy Aged 20 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Appellant: 1.GP FOR APPEALS (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. Mr.Balia Ravindranath 2. Smt.SavithriDevi ...APPELLANT ...RESPONDENT 2 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_455_2016 & batch The Court made the following Common Judgment: (PerHonbiesnjustic eMnaiajayasurya) Heard Mr.T.S.Rayalu, learned Government Pleader for Appeals for the appellants. Also heard Smt.Savithri Devi, learned counsel for the respondents / claimants, who appeared through online. Aggrieved by a Common Order dated 10.02.2016 in L.A.O.P.No$.285, 286, 299, 300 and 330 of 2012 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, • Allagadda, the State preferred the present batch of appeals. The respondents herein are the claimants in the said O.Ps. For the purpose of excavation of 45-L/R2 Minor Distributory in Block No.21 of Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, the Special Deputy Collector / Land Acquisition Officer issued a Notification dated 15.01.2006 under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for acquisition of land of an extent of Ac.5.35 cents in the village limits of Mandalur Village, Rudravaram Mandal belonging to the respondents / claimants. The Land Acquisition Officer by conducting Award enquiry, classified the lands into two • categories i.e., (i) dry lands, (ii) irrigated dry lands and fixed the market value 2. 3. @ Rs.30,000/- and Rs.40,000/- per acre respectively. The respondents / claimants while receiving the compensation under protest, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. Before the Reference Court, the respondents claimed an amount of 4. Rs.2,00,000/- per acre and in support of their case, examined P.Ws.1 (claimant in O.P.No.299 of 2012) to P.W.3 and got marked Exs.AI- Certified Copy of the Sale Deed dated 16.06.2003 and Ex.A2-Rudravaram 3 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_455_2016 & batch issued by Special Deputy Collector (L.A.), S.R.B.C., Nandyal. adduced. Attested Mandal Map On behalf of the Referring Officer, no oral evidence was No. 100/2006 dated 24.03.2006 in respect of the lands in Copy of the Award question was marked as Ex.BI. 5. The Reference Court, on an appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, enhanced the compensation in respect of subject lands to Rs.1,00,000/-. the learned Government Pleader, vehemently contends enhancement of the compensation by the Reference Court is without any valid basis. He submits that the respondents / claimants have not adduced any cogent evidence to substantiate their claim for enhancement of that Ex.A1-Sale transaction dated 16.06.2003 Mr.T.S.Rayalu 6. that the the compensation. He argues is in respect of the lands situated in altogether a different village i.e., Chinna Kambaluru, and even according to the respondents / claimants, the distance the said village and the subject matter lands under acquisition situated in Mandalur Village is about 10 Kms. Therefore, the said sale transaction ought not to have been taken into consideration and the value Land Acquisition Officer by taking the sale statistics at the time of between fixed by the Award enquiry ought not to have been interfered with by the Reference Court. Making, the said submissions, the learned counsel urges for allowing the appeals. 7. On the other hand • respondents / claimants appearing through on Smt.Savithri Devi, learned counsel for the line made submissions to I % 4 NIS, J & TRR, J LAAS_455_2016 & batch sustain the order of the Reference Court. She contends that the Reference Court considered both oral and documentary evidence in the proper perspective and in the light of the settled legal position referred to in the order under challenge, no interference is called for by this Court in the present appeals. 8. This Court has considered the submissions made and the point that arises for consideration is ; Whether the fixation of market value by the Reference Court vide Common Order under challenge warrants interference by this Court as the same is excessive? At the outset, it may be appropriate to mention that hundreds of acres of land situated in different villages of Kurnool District were acquired for the purpose of the Telugu Ganga Project. Most of these villages are contiguous and nature of the land in most of these villages is similar. Be that as it may. As noted earlier, seeking enhancement of the compensation in respect of the subject matter lands, the claimants got examined P.W.1 (claimant in L.A.O.P.No.299 of 2012) and P.Ws.2 and 3. They relied on Ex.AI dated 16.06.2003 which is in respect of land situated at Chinna Kambaluru Village, wherein an extent of Ac.0.50 cents was sold for Rs.40,000/- which works out 9. 10. to Rs.80,000/- per acre. In the claim statement before the Reference Court, the respondents / claimants stated that the fixation of market value is too low, that the Land Acquisition Officer was not correct in making the classification of lands and that it is proper to fix the market value @ Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. P.W.1 filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination asserting the contents of the njs,j&trr,j ^ LAAS_455_2016 & batch of the attestors to the Sale Deed dated P.W.3, one claim statement. 16.06.2003(Ex.A1) supported the version of P.W.1. Most importantly, P.W.2, Mandal Agricultural Officer whose jurisdiction extends to Mandaluru wherein the subject lands and Chinna Kambaluru village wherein the Village Ex.A1 land are situated, categorically deposed that the said lands are having similar crop pattern, productivity and the market value. Nothing contra was elicited in the cross examination of P.Ws.1 to 3. It is also brought on record that the said villages are situated within a distance of 10 Kms., radius. However, no contra evidence was adduced either oral or documentary on behalf of the Referring Officer, in the absence of which, the compensation has to be fixed on the basis of the evidence adduced by the claimants. At this juncture, the contention raised by the learned Government Pleader with regard to the sales statistics relied on by the Land Acquisition Officer may also be referred to. However, it is settled law that unless the sale transactions forming basis for fixation of compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer are exhibited, the same cannot be treated as evidence though a reference was made in the Award [See: Chimanlal Hargovinddas V. Spl.Land Acquisition Officer, Poona (1988 (3) SCC 751)]. Therefore, mere marking of Ex.BI-Award in the absence of oral and documentary evidence supporting the fixation of market value by the Land Acquisition Officer would not enure to the benefit of the State. Be that as it may. 11. J 6 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_455_2016 & batch 12. In the land acquisition matters, the Law is well settled that the Court is required to fix the just and reasonable compensation. 13. In the present case, to substantiate their claim for enhancement, the respondents / claimants placed reliance on Ex.A1-Registered Sale Deed dated 16.06.2003. The sale transaction is in respect of an extent of Ac.0.50 cents (''/2 acre) for Rs.40,000/- which took place more than 2 years prior to the issuance of Section 4 (1) Notification dated 15.01.2006 in respect of the subject matter lands. In the absence of any contra material on record adduced by the Referring Officer, the Court has no option except to take the said Sale Deed into consideration, by taking the time gap of 2 >2 years. In Omprakash and Ors., v. Union of lndia\ the Hon’ble Supreme Court opined that 12% value appreciation per annum, in the attending facts 14. and circumstances can be taken into consideration. Therefore, by taking the time gap of 2 72 years and the value appreciation @ 12% p.a., the market value of the subject matter lands on the basis of Ex.AI would come to Rs.1,06,373/-, which is more than the market value fixed by the Reference Court @ Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre. Though the subject matter lands are categorized into dry lands and irrigated dry lands, going by the evidence on record, more particularly P.W.2-Agricultural Officer and the potentiality of the acquired lands which are suitable for both commercial and food crops by virtue of Telugu Ganga Project / Distributory canals, fixation of compensation ‘air 2004 SC 4135 7 NJS, J & TRR, J J LAAS_45S 2016 & batch uniformly @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre, in the considered opinion of this Court is just and reasonable. Accordingly, the point is answered. 15. Having considered the matter in its entirety, there are no grounds to interfere with the well reasoned order of the learned Reference Court. 16. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the appeals fail and the same are accordingly dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda. (with records) 2. Two CCs to GP for Appeals, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 3. One CC to Sri Balia Ravindranath & Smt. K. Savithri devi Advocate [OPUC] 4. The V.R Section, Section Officer, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 5. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED: 10/07/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE LAAS NO: 455,458,462,466 & 475 OF 2016 OF 5( > I SEP 2025 ,c r*-: ★vujrrMt Sectioax" * > dismissing the APPEAL’S APHC010164582016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 458 OF 2016 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector(LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Appellant AND N Linga Reddy, S/o. Sanjeeva Reddy, aged 30 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, RudravaramMandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.285/2012 dt. 10-2-2016. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of GP FOR APPEALS, on behalf of the Appellant and of Sri. Balia Ravindranath & Smt. K. Savithri Devi , Advocate appeared for Respondent. This Court Doth Order and Decree as follows:- 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda. (with records) 2. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED: 10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS NO: 458 OF 2016 DISMISSING THE APPEAL APHC010222382016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITIONFIRSTAPPEAL NO: 462 OF 2016 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector (LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Petitioner AND P Eswara Reddy, S/o. Nagi Reddy, aged about 48 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.299/2012 dt.10-2-2016. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of GP FOR APPEALS behalf of the Appellant and of Sri. Balia Ravindranath & Smt. K. Savithri Devi, Advocate appeared for Respondent. on This Court Doth Order and Decree as follows:- 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda. (with records) 2. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS NO: 462 OF 2016 a t I SEP 20?5 IS ^^HiLrrontSecti*!^ Co DISMISSING THE APPEAL > - APHC010906232016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI V., i, THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE r% Y-' # 2 /f'-j! .XJ ‘ '-f * r' . PRESENT ‘V- •I' THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION FIRST APPEAL NO: 466 OF 2016 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector (LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Petitioner AND P Sankar Reddy, S/o. Subba Reddy, aged 33 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. j ...Respondent Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.286/2012 dt. 10-2-2016. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of GP FOR APPEALS, on behalf of the Appellant and of Sri. Balia Ravindranath & Smt. K. Savithri Devi, Advocate appeared for Respondent. This Court Doth Order and Decree as follows;- 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda. (with records) 2. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS NO: 466 OF 2016 of y' ■ g( I I SEP 2025 Sectioji^* O. DISMISSING THE APPEAL APHC010598902016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION FIRST APPEAL NO: 475 OF 2016 Between; The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector(LA, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal. ...Appellant AND K Konda Reddy, S/o Sanjeeva Reddy, aged 60 years, R/o Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.330/2012 dt. 10-2-2016. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of GP FOR APPEALS, on behalf of the Appellant and of Sri. Balia Ravindranath & Smt. K. Savithri Devi, Advocate appeared for Respondent. This Court Doth Order and Decree as follows:- 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda. (with records) 2. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS NO: 475 OF 2016 of ^ I I SEP 2025 lV C- ■ ' }rf fCr; 7 DISMISSING THE APPEAL APHC010290112016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 455 OF 2016 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, cum-Special Deputy Collector (LA) Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal ...Appellant AND N Linga Murthy Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy, aged 20 years Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. R/o. Mandaluru ...Respondent Appeal filed under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act of 1894, aggrieved by the order and decree passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda in OP.No.300/2012 dt. 10-2-2016. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the trial Court and the material papers in the Suit and upon hearing the arguments of GP FOR APPEALS, on behalf of the Appellant and of Sri Balia Ravindranath & Smt. K. Savithri Devi , Advocate appeared for Respondent. This Court Doth Order and Decree as follows:- 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there will be no order as to costs. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda. (with records) 2. Two CD Copies PR vna HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE ^ ' ' SEP 2025^% ★SLuffentSectiojux^ LAAS NO: 455 OF 2016 DISMISSING THE APPEAL