IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No’s: 420.424 & 535 of 2016 and 228 of 2017 LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 420 OF 2016 APHC010349132016 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in LAO.P.No.292 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant / Referring officer AND N.Sanjeeva Reddy, S/o. Sanjeeva Reddy, age 55 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 2016 (LAASMP 1194 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 pursuant to decree and order passed in OP No.292/2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.S RAYALU, GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent : SRI BALLA RAVINDRANATH & SMT K.SAVITHRI DEVI LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 424 OF 2016 APHC010180492016 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.289 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal,Kurnool District. ..Appellant/ Referring officer AND P.Rose Reddy, S/o.Chow Reddy, Age 64 Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. years, R/o.Mandaluru Village ...Respondent/Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 2016(LAASMP 1198 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 pursuant to decree and order passed in LAOP No.289/2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.S RAYALU, GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent : SRI BALLA RAVINDRANATH & SMT K.SAVITHRI DEVI LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 535 OF 2016 APHC010057102016 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.290 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. Between: The Special Deputy Coliector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ...Appellant/ Referring officer AND N.Lalithamma, W/o.Ramasekhar Reddy, Age 32 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 201 SfLAASMP 1365 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 pursuant to the order and decree passed in OP No.290/2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.S RAYALU, GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent : SRI BALLA RAVINDRANATH & SMT K.SAVITHRI DEVI LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 228 OF 2017 APHC010587862017 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.291 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015. on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant/Referringofficer AND S.Konda Reddy, S/o.Venkata Reddy, Age 60 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District ...Respondent/ Claimant c lA NO: 1 OF 2017 (LAASMP 364 OF 2017) 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 pursuant of decree and order passed in OP No.291/2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.S RAYALU, GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent : SRI BALLA RAVINDRANATH & SMT K.SAVITHRI DEVI The Court made the following: 1 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_420_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: 420. 424 & 535 of 2016 and 228 of 2017 LAAS No.420 of 2016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. AND N.Sanjeeva Reddy, S/o.Sanjeeva Reddy, Aged 55 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...APPELLANT ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1.GP FOR APPEALS (AP) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. Mr.Balia Ravindranath 2. Smt.Savithri Devi 2 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_420_2016 & batch The Court made the following Common Judgment: (PerHomiesnjustice Nmaiajayasurya) Heard Mr.T.S.Rayalu, learned Governnient 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 17.11.2015 in L.A.O.P.Nos.289, 290, 291 and 292 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. 2. For the purpose of excavation of 21/46R 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.9.89 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 3. categories i.e., (i) dry lands, (ii) irrigated dry lands and fixed the market value @ 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. 4. Before the Reference Court, the respondents claimed an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- per acre and in support of their case, examined P.Ws.1 (claimant in O.P.No.289 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_420 2016 & batch Mandal Map issued by Special Deputy Collector (L.A.), S.R.B.C., Nandyal. On behalf of the Referring Officer, no oral evidence was adduced. Attested Copy of the Award No.107/2006 dated 24.03.2006 in respect of the lands in 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/-. Mr.T.S.Rayalu, the learned Government Pleader, vehemently contends 6. that the 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 the compensation. He argues that Ex.AI-Sale transaction dated 16.06.2003 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 between the said village and the subject matter lands under acquisition situated in Mandalur Villages is about 10 Kms. Therefore, the said sale transaction ought not to have been taken into consideration and the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer by taking the sale statistics at the time of 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. On the other hand, Smt.Savithri Devi, learned counsel for the 7. respondents / claimants appearing through on line made submissions to 4 r NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_420_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. 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? 8. 9. 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. 10. 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.289 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 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 5 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_420_2016 & batch claim statement. P.W.3, one. of the attestors to the Sale Deed dated 16.06.2003(Ex.A1) supported the version of P.W.1. Most importantly, P.W.2, the Mandal Agricultural Officer whose jurisdiction extends to Mandaluru Village, wherein the subject lands and Chinna Kambaluru village wherein 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 11. 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) SCO 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. 6 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS 420_2016 & batch c In the land acquisition matters, the Law is well settled that the Court is required to fix the just and reasonable compensation. 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 ( 72 acre) for Rs.40,000/- which took place more than 2 72 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 7 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 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 12. 13. 14. ^ AIR 2004 SC 4135 7 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_420_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. Having considered the matter in its entirety, there are no grounds to interfere with the well reasoned order of the learned Reference Court. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the appeals fail and the same are accordingly dismissed. No costs. 15. 16. 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, Kurnool District (with records) 2. One CC to Sri Balia Ravindranath & Smt K.Savithri Devi, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP for Appeals, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. The Section Officer, V.R Section, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati 5. Three CD Copies MV vna HIGH COURT DATED: 10/07/2025 COMMON JUDGMENT + DECREE LAAS No’s. 420,424 & 535 of 2016 and 228 of 2017 Ik O' 10 Sf^ ?0?5 X m o 9>ij; Current Section . ★ DISMISSING THESE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUITS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 420 OF 2016 APHC010349132016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project,Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant / Referring officer AND N.Sanjeeva Reddy, S/o. Sanjeeva Reddy, age 55 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.292 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Lower Court, and material papers in the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri T.S.Rayalu, GP for Appeals, " for the Appellant, and Smt K.Savithri Devi, Advocate for the Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District 2. Three CD Copies MV vna HIGH COURT DATED: 10/07/2025 DECREE of ANDfS? LAAS No. 420 of 2016 ac m O ^ . Current Section , ^ DISMISSING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AA/IARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 424 OF 2016 APHC010180492016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer. Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant/ Referring officer AND P.Rose Reddy, S/o.Chow Reddy, Age 64 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.289 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Lower Court, and material papers in the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri T.S.Rayalu, GP for Appeals, for the Appellant, and Smt K.Savithri Devi, Advocate for the Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District 2. Three CD Copies MV vna HIGH COURT DATED; 10/07/2025 DECREE ^ andh^% g (8 SEP 2025 a, ^ Currenl section LAAS No. 424 of 2016 DISMISSING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 535 OF 2016 APHC010057102016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project,Nandyal, Kurnool District. ...Appellant/ Referring officer AND N.Lalithamma, W/o.Ramasekhar Reddy, Age 32 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.290 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Alfagadda, Kurnool District. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Lower Court, and material papers in the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri T.S.Rayalu, GP for Appeals, for the Appellant, and Smt K.Savithri Devi, Advocate for the Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: 1, That the appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District 2. Three CD Copies MV vna HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAASNo. 535 of 2016 % I 10 SEP 20?5 ^ . Current Section 5^^spatcvV^ DISMISSING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 228 OF 2017 APHC010587862017 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant/ Referring officer AND S.Konda Reddy, S/o.Venkata Reddy, Age 60 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in L.A.O.P.No.291 of 2012 dated 18.11.2015 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. • W This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Lower Court, and material the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri T.S.Rayalu, GP for Appeals for the Appellant, and Smt K.Savithri Devi, Advocate for the Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: papers in 1. That the appeal be and is hereby dismissed. 2. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- S.V.S.R.MURTHY JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// 4^ SECTION OFFICER To. 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District 2. Three CD Copies MV vna HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS No. 228 of 2017 ^OF ANDS^ o\ ^ 10 SEP 2025 m; ‘5, Ofl, . Curreni Section . J DISMISSING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT