IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMAR THURSDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTYFIVE K Oi PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 72 OF 2022 Appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the Order and Decree, dated 30-11-2001 passed in L.A.O.P. NO. 61 of 1991 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. Between: 1. Narra Papa Rao ( C.1 died ), (Appellant Nos. 2, 8 to 10 are LRs of this appellant who are already on record as claimant Nos. 2,12 to14 in the Decree ) 2. Narra Brammanandam, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.2 ), aged 59 years, agriculturist, R/o. Munnangivaripalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. 3. Guntamadugu Vijayabhaskar Raju, S/o Lakshmi Raju ( C.3 ), aged about 50 years, JVR Colony, Podalakur Road, Nellore town and District. 4. Devalla Sudarshanamma, W/o Audisesha Reddy ( C.4 ), aged about 60 years, R/o Tatiparthi Village, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 5. Sreekireddy Kanthamma, W/o Venkatasesha Reddy ( C.9 ), aged about 67 years, R/o Chennuru Village, Gudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 6. N.V. Rama Raju @ Venkataramana Raju ( C.10 ), S/o Late Venkatasubba Raju, aged 67 years, R/o. JVR Colony, Podalakur Road, Nellore town and District. 7. Bandi Chandra Sekhar Reddy alias Sekhar Reddy ( C.11), S/o. Somi Reddy, agriculturist, aged 48 years, R/o. 18-5-373, Saptagirinagar Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 8. Narra Hah Babu, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.12), aged 52 years, agriculturist, R/o. Munnangivaripalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. 9. Narra Poornachandra Rao, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.13), aged 53 years, agriculturist, R/o. Veerannapalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal Prakasam District. lO.Narra Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.14), aged 57 years, agriculturist, R/o. Munnangivaripalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. ... Appellants/Claimant Nos.1 to 4 8, 9 to 14 AND 1. The Special Deputy Collector, (Land Acquisition), Telugu Ganga Project, Nellore. ...Respondent/Referring Officer 2. Manneti Venkatasubbaiah (C.5), Manneti Venkatasubbaiah (C.5) 3. Kondareddy Rami Reddy (C.6), Kondareddy Rami Reddy (C.6) 4. Chintamreddy Linga Reddy (C.7.), Chintamreddy Linga Reddy (C.7.) 5. Nallagondia Konda Reddy (C.8), Nallagondia Konda Reddy (C.8) 6. K. Ramanaiah (C.15), K. Ramanaiah (C.15). Respondents/Claima Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 are not necessary parties ...RESPONDENTS / CLAIMANTS This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Order and Decree of the Trial Court, and material papers in the petition and upon hearing arguments of Sri Chetiuru Sreenivas, Advocate for Appellants and the Government Pleader for Appeals/Respondent No.1 THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE: 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby allowed by enhancing the compensation for Pomegranate trees @ Rs.3,000/- per tree, 2. That the appellants be and are hereby directed to pay the Court fee on the enhanced compensation amount; 3. That the appellants be and are hereby not entitled to interest during period of delay in preferring the appeal after disposal of the L.A.O.P by the Reference Court; 4. That the appellants be and are hereby entitled to compensation for the total number of trees as identified by the Land Acquisition Officer the in the Award, and not on the total number of trees as the appellants claimed in the Reference Court; and 5. That there be no order as to costs in this Appeal. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC OFFICER 1. The Additional CivilJudge(Senior Division), Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. 2. Two CD Copies To. psr RAM ♦ !> 4 ■> 1,,, I A .V i HIGH COURT DATED;01/05/2025 DECREE AND##^ 0" X I I 3UL 2025 „ ^ Current Section ^ ^ LAAS.No.72 of 2022 f ALLOWING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AM THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE w " "O 1 ,,7’5 w/ y PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 72 OF 2022 Appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the Order and Decree, dated 30-11-2001 passed in L.A.O.P. NO. 61 of 1991 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, SPSR Nellore District. Between: 1. Narra Papa Rao ( C.1 died ), (Appellant Nos. 2, 8 to 10 are LRs of this appellant who are already on record as claimant Nos. 2,12 to14 in the Decree ) 2. Narra Brammanandam, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.2 ), aged 59 years, agriculturist, R/o. Munnangivaripalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. 3. Guntamadugu Vijayabhaskar Raju, S/o Lakshmi Raju ( C.3 ), aged about 50 years, JVR Colony, Podalakur Road, Nellore town and District. 4. Devalla Sudarshanamma, W/o Audisesha Reddy ( C.4 ), aged about 60 years, R/o Tatiparthi Village, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 5. Sreekireddy Kanthamma, W/o Venkatasesha Reddy ( C.9 ), aged about 67 years, R/o Chennuru Village, Gudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 6. N.V. Rama Raju @ Venkataramana Raju { C.10 ), S/o Late Venkatasubba Raju, aged 67 years, R/o. JVR Colony, Podalakur Road, Nellore town and District. 7. Bandi Chandra Sekhar Reddy alias Sekhar Reddy ( C.11), S/o. Somi Reddy, agriculturist, aged 48 years, R/o. 18-5-373, Saptagirinagar, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 8. Narra Hah Babu, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.12), aged 52 years, agriculturist, R/o. Munnangivaripalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. 9. Narra Poornachandra Rao, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.13), aged 53 years, agriculturist, R/o. Veerannapalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal, Prakasam District. lO.Narra Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Papa Rao ( C.14). aged 57 years, agriculturist,, R/o. Munnangivaripalem Village, Yaddanapudi Mandal Prakasam District. ... Appellants/Claimant Nos.1 to 4 8, 9 to 14 AND 1. The Special Deputy Collector, (Land Acquisition), Telugu Ganqa Project, Nellore. ...RESPONDENT / REFERRING OFFICER 2. Manneti Venkatasubbaiah (C.5), Manneti Venkatasubbaiah (C.5) 3. Kondareddy Rami Reddy (C.6), Kondareddy Rami Reddy (C.6) 4. Chintamreddy Linga Reddy (C.7.), Chintamreddy Linga Reddy (C.7.) 5. Nallagondia Konda Reddy (C.8), Nallagondia Konda Reddy (C.8) 6. K. Ramanaiah (C.15), K. Ramanaiah (C.15). Respondents/Claima Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 are not necessary parties ...RESPONDENTS / CLAIMANTS Counsel for the Appellants : SRI. CHETLURU SREENIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR APPEALS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No. 72 OF 2022 JUDGMENT: {Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya) The land of the claimants was acquired by the respondent authorities of Telugu Ganga Project for foreshore submersion of Kandaleru Reservoir. Aggrieved by the fixation of low and small amount for the trees, the appellants-claimants have received the compensation on protest and requested to refer the award to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for short the Act). Accordingly, the award was referred and registered as L.A.O.P.No.61 of 1991 on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gudur. On considering the evidence, both oral and documentary, the Reference Court has answered the reference by enhancing compensation for trees. 2. Dissatisfied with the compensation granted to the appellants for Pomegranate trees vide order in L.A.O.P.No.61 of 1991 on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, dated 30.11.2001, the present L.A.A.S.No.72 of 2022 came to be filed seeking enhancement of the compensation of the trees. .t 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that this Court, the composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad and the Hon’ble Apex Court have fixed the rate for pomegranate trees @ Rs.3,000/- per tree and for mango trees @ Rs.3,000/- per tree and for coconut trees @ Rs.3,00,0/- per tree and for sweet orange trees (cheeni trees) @ Rs.4,000/- per tree and hence urged this Court to enhance the compensation for the aforesaid trees and to pass the orders in the present appeal. same 4. The appellants’relied on the judgment of this Court in a batch of appeals vide L.A.A.S.No.35 of 2019 and batch dated 27.09.2023, L.A.A.S.No.61 of 2022 and batch dated 05.10.2023, L.A.A.S.No.31 of 2019 dated 27.06.2019 and L.A.A.S.No.2 of 2023 dated 04.09.2023, and also the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in D.Eswara Naidu & ors. Vs. the Special Deputy Collector (LA.) in Civil Appeal No. 11355 of 2018 dated 20.11.2018, the judgment of the composite High Court in The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Somasila Project, Unit-IV, Rajampet, Kadapa, Kadapa District \/s. Peddireddy Madhava Reddy and others. In the said judgment, the composite High Court has fixed Rs.3,000/- per each mango tree, acid lime tree, coconut tree, guava, jack-fruit and sapota (sapodilla) and also for the trees of pomegranate, drumstick and neredu (black-plum), and so far as the 3 tamarind and soap-nut are concerned, the Court'has fixed Rs.6,000/- and Rs.5,000/- respectively for each tree. Learned counsel for the appellants further relied on the judgment of this Court in LAAS No.28 of 2019 and batch dated 05.11.2019, LAAS No.61 of 2023, LAAS No.63 of 2022 and the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court in Pidugu Kondala Rayudu v. Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Telugu Ganga Project Unit, Kadapa\ The Hon ble Apex Court in D. Eswara Naidu & Ors., versus The Special Deputy ColJector(O.A.f dated 20.11.2018, inter alia held as follows; 5. “2. The issue raised in these appeals pertains to the claim made by the appellants for enhancement of compensation for pomegranate trees, which stood in the land acquired for the purpose of Somashila/Telugu Ganga Project. The notifications in these cases have been issued on different dates between 1990 to 1994. The appellants have beenigranted compensation at the rate of Rs.2000/- per Pomegranate Tree. We find from Civil Appeal Nos.11404-11405 of 2016 that this Court has fixed compensation at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per pomegranate tree, as against the Rs.2000/- fixed by the High Court, in respect of the acquisition for the same project, for which notification was issued Having regard to the entire facts and * in the year 1994. circumstances of the case, we are of the view that it would be just, reasonable and proper to fix the compensation at the rate of '2012(12) see 848 ^2019 (13) see 785 4 Rs.3.000/- per Pomegranate Tree. Therefore, these appeals disposed of with the following directions: The appellants shall be entitled to compensation at the of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) per Pomegranate Tree along with all statutory benefits. However, they shall not be entitled to statutory interest for the period of del^y in approaching this Court or the High Court. The compensation to the claimants shall be made within three months from today.” are (i) rate (ii) (iii) 6. In the judgment rendered in LAAS No.417 of 2008 , a Division Bench of this Court granted compensation in respect of trees, in the following manner: Mango, Acid Lime, Coconut, Guava, Jack-fruit & Sapota (Sapodilla) Tamarind Cheeni (Sweet Orange) Soap-nut Cashew nut trees Drumstick & Neredu (Black-plum) Dates & Palmyra trees Remaining trees Pomegranate tree Rs.3,000/- per tree Rs.6,000/- per tree Rs.4,000/- per tree Rs.5,000/- per tree Rs.2,500/- per tree Rs.2,000/- per tree Rs. 300/- per tree Rs. 400/- per tree Rs.3,000/- per tree 7. In Civil Appeal No.2947 of 2022, the Hon'ble Apex Court has fixed compensation for the pomegranate trees @ Rs.3,000/- following the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in D.Eswara Naidu & per tree. 5 ors Vs. The SfDecial Deputy Collector (LA.) (referred supra), in Civil Appeal No. 11355 of 2018 in respect of the very same project. 8. Learned Government Pleader for; Appeals has relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ashok Kumar and another Vs. State of Haryana. The said judgment does not pertain to the valuation of the trees. The issue in the present appeal pertains to the valuation of the trees. Hence, the said judgment is not applicable to the present facts of the case. 9. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals further stated that the trees existed were pre-bearing trees (plants) and accordingly the value was fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer and the Reference Court has rightly answered the said issue and stated that the appellants are not entitled for the enhancement of compensation on the basis of the judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the appellants, as they are pre-bearing trees. Hence, urged this Court to dismiss the appeal filed under Section 54 of the Act, as the appellants are not entitled for any enhancement of compensation. 10. In the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in D.Es^ara Naidu & ors Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (LA.) (referred supra) in Civil Appeal No. 11355 of 2018, the Hon’ble Apex Court has fixed the rate for the pomegranate trees and other trees for the very same f‘n 6 S Somasila/Telugu Ganga Project @ Rs.3,000/- as against Rs.2,000/- and held that the appellants are entitled to compensation @ Rs.3,000/- for pomegranate tree along with all statutory benefits and also further observed that every appellant is not entitled to statutory interest for the period of delay in approaching the High Court. The Court did not make a distinction between fruit-bearing and pre-bearing trees. Therefore, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of orders mentioned above for increasing of compensation for Pomegranate trees. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals has disputed about the number of trees. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow the appeal on fair admission made by the learned counsel for the appellants that,the compensation may be enhanced as per the number of trees as identified by the Land Acquisition Officer in the award, as the appellants are not insisted for grant of compensation for the number of trees which is pleaded by the appellants in the appeal. Therefore, it is made clear that the appellants are entitled to compensation for the total number of trees as identified by the Land Acquisition Officer in the award and not on the total number of trees as the appellants claimed in the Reference 11. Court. 7 As the claim is only with regard to the trees, the present appeal is alldwed, enhancing the compensation for Pomegranate trees @ 12. Rs.3,000/- per tree. 13. The appellants shall pay the Court fee on the enhanced compensation amount. The appellants are not entitled to interest during the period of delay in preferring the appeal after disposal of the L.A.O.P. by the Reference Court. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR TON OFFICER I //TRUE COPY// SEC To t 1. The Additional CivilJudge(Senior Division) Gudur District,(WITH RECQRDS) 2. One CC to.Sji Chetiuru Sreenivas, 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 5. The Section Officer, Scrutiny Section (New Filing) High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 6. Two CD Copies SPSR Nellore psr RAM ,T HIGH COURT DATED:01/05/2025 JUDGMENT LAAS.No.72 of 2022 § 1(1 JUL 2025 5 ^ . Current Section f^SpATCI^S^' ALLOWING THE LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS