r- 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 : 403. 448. 454 and 456 of 2016 LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No: 403 of 2016 APHC010649742016 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in O.P.No.440 of 2013 dated 03/02/2016 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.Raja Sekhar Reddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, aged 26 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnbol District. ...Respondent / Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 2016 (LAASMP 1177 OF 2Q16I 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 OP No.440/2013 dated 03.02.2016 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: 448 OF 2016 APHC010174972016 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in O.P.No.443 of 2013 dated 03.02.2016 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allagadda, Kurnool District. Between: The Land Acquisition Officer-cum- Special Deputy Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant / Referring officer AND S.Rama Vijay Reddy, S/o. Rama Subba Reddy. Aged 36 years, R/o. Chagalamarri Village, Chagalamarri Mandal, Kurnool District ...Respondent/ Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 2016 ILAASMP 1252 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.443/2013 dated 03.02.2016 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District 3 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: 454 OF 2016 APHC010057942016 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in O.P No.445/2013 dated 03.02.2016 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 S.Nagi Reddy, S/o. Hussain Reddy, Aged 30 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent/ Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 2016fLAASMP 1267 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.445/2013 dt.03.02.2016 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: 456 OF 2016 APHC010056302016 m Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in O.P No.444/2013 dated 03.02.2016 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 S.Siva Sankara Reddy, S/o. Pedda Thirupal Reddy, aged 40 years, R/o. Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...Respondent / Claimant lA NO: 2 OF 2016 ILAASMP 1269 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.444/2013 dt.03.02.2016 the file of Senior Civil Judge, Allagadda, Kurnool District. on 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 I NJS, J & TRR, J ■ LAAS_403_201€ & 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 LANci ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT Nos: 403, 448, 454 and 456 of 2016 LAAS No.403 of 2016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ...APPELLANT AND N.Raja Sekhar Reddy, S/o.Linga Reddy Aged 26 years, R/o.Mandaluru Village, Rudravaram Mandal, Kurnool District. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: 1.GP FOR APPEALS (AP) i Counsel for the Respondent: 1. Mr.Balia Ravindranath 2. Smt.Savithri Devi 2 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_403_2016 & batch I The Court made the following Common Judgment: (PerHon'ble Sri Justice Nmaig Jayasurya) Heard Mr.T.S.Rayalu, learned Government Pleader for Appeals. Also heard Smt.Savithri Devi, learned counsel for the respondents / claimants, who appeared through online. Aggrieved by a Conrimon Order dated 03.02.2016 in L.A.O.P.Nos.43 8, 439, 440, 442, 443, 444 and 445 of 2013 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. 3. Fpr the purpose of excavation pf Major Channel Distributory in Block No.19 of Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, the Special Deputy Collectoc/ Land Acquisition Officer issued a Notification dated 01.02.2005 under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for acquisition of land of an extent of Ac. 16.30 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 @ Rs.48,000/- and Rs.58,000/- per acre respectively. The respondents / claimantts 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.440 of 2013) 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_403_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.20/2004-05 dated 19.03.2005 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.92,000/-. 6. Mr.T.S.Rayalu, the learned Goyernment Pleader, vehemently contends that the enhancement of the compensation by the Reference Court is without any valid basis. He subrpits that the respondents / claimants have not adduced any cogent evidence to substantiate their claim for enhancement of the compensation. He argues that Ex.A1-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 legrned counsel urges for allov\^ing the appeals. • 7. On the other hand, Smt.Savithri Devi, learned counsel for the respondents / claimants appearing through on line made submissions to I 4 NJ^, J & TRR, J , iAAS_403_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? 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.440 of 2013) and P.Ws.2 and 3. They relied on Ex.A1 dated l 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 R's.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 jn lieu of chief examination asserting the contents of the 8. 9. 10. NJS, J & TRR, J ^ .LAAS_403_2016 & batch claim statement. P.W.3, one of the attestors to the Sale Deed dated 16.06.2p03(Ex.A1) support,ed the version of P.W.1. Most importantly, P.W.2, the Mandal Agricultural Officer who^e jurisdiction extends to Ma^daluru 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 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) 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. was 11. ! 6 NJS, J & TRR, J LAAS_403_2016 & batch In the land acquisition matters, the Law is well settled that the Court is 12. required to fix the just and reasonable compensation. In the present case, to substantiate their claim for enhancement, the 13. respondents / claimants placed reliance on Ex.AI-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 1 >2 years prior to the issiiance of Section 4 (1) Notification dated 01.02.2005 m 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 1 V2 years. In Omprakash and Ors., v. Union of lndia\ the Hon’ble Supreme 14. / 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 1 14 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.94,^76/-, which is more than the‘market value fixed by the Reference Court @ Rs.92,000/- 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 A/7S, J & TRa^ J ’ LAAS_403_2016 <S botch uniformly @ Rs.92.000/- 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 15. 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 16. same are , accordingly dismissed. No costs. Applications pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. Consequently, the Miscellaneous 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, VR 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. 403,448,454 and 456 of 2016 sf 1 I SEP 2025 jirront DISMISSING THESE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUITS i 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: 448 OF 2016 APHC010174972016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant / Referring officer AND S.Rama Vijay Reddy, S/o. Rama Subba Reddy, Aged 36 years, R/o. Chagalamarri Village, Chagalamarri Mandal, Kurnool District ...Respondent/ Claimant Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the order and decree passed in O.P.No.443 of 2013 dated 03.02.2016 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 A the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri T.S.Rayalu, GP for Appeals, for the Appellant, and Sri Balia Ravindranath, Smt K.Savithri Devi. Advocates 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 HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS No. 448 of 2016 gf 1 1 SEP 2025 Jg) ^^SQjrrent Sectjoj^x*^ c5^ 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: 454 OF 2016 APHC010057942016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project,Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant / Referring officer AND S.Nagi Reddy, S/o. Hussain Reddy, Aged 30 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 O.P No.445/2013 dated 03.02.2016 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 Sri Balia Ravindranath, Smt K.Savithri Devi, Advocates 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 LAAS No. 454 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: 456 OF 2016 APHC010056302016 m Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, Kurnool District. ..Appellant / Referring officer AND S.Siva Sankara Reddy, S/o. Pedda Thirupal Reddy, aged 40 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 O.P No.444/2013 dated 03.02.2016 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 Sri Balia Ravindranath, Smt K.Savithri Devi Advocates 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 ♦ HIGH COURT DATED:10/07/2025 DECREE LAAS No. 456of2016 SJ /O Tf' S( 1 I SEP 2025 «=k m! ' ^‘SsseaisssS-^ DISMISSING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT 4 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 V' AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No: 403 of 2016 APHC010649742016 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum- Land Acquisition Officer, Telugu Ganga Project,Nandyal, Kurnool District. ...Appellant / Referring officer AND N.Raja Sekhar Reddy, S/o. Linga Reddy, aged 26 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 O.P.No.440 of 2013 dated 03/02/2016 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 Sri Balia Ravindranath, Advocates for the Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: Smt K.Savithri Devi, 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 LAAS No. 403 of 2016 gf I I SEP 2025 ^■Ssgsaifisss^ rf' . Irr»: c<e DISMISSING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT