IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 850 OF 2006 Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the Judgment and Decree, dated 07-03-2006 passed in LAOP.No.19 of 1997 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District. Between: 1. Bandi Venkata Ramana Reddy (Died per LR 2"'* Appellant), S/o.Sangi Reddy, Hindu, Land Owner, R/o.3/349, Lakshmipuram, Nellore. 2. Bandi Sangi Reddy, S/o.Late Bandi Venkata Ramana Reddy, aged about 58 years, R/o.3/349, Laxmipuram, Nellore. (2"'^ Appellant is brought on record as LR of deceased sole appellant as per the Court Order, dated 11-09-2014 made In LAASMP.758 of 2014.) ...Claimant/Appellant AND The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Nellore. ...Respondent/Respondent Counsel for Appellant ;Srl M.S.R.Chandra Murthy Counsel for the Respondent :Sri T.S.Rayalu, GP for Appeals The Court made the following: APHC010537552006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3526] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No.850 of 2006 Between: Bandi Venkata Ramana Reddy, (died) per L.R., Bandi Sangi Reddy, S/o. Late Bandi Venkata Ramana Reddy ... Appellant AND The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Nellore ... Respondent Mr.M.S.R.Chandra Murthy Mr.T.S.Rayalu, G.P. for Appeals Counsel for the Appellant Counsel for the Respondent : The Court made the following JUDGMENT: (per NJS,J) The present appeal has been preferred against the orders dated 07.3.2006 in L.A.O.P. No.19 of 1997 on the file of the Court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore. The original appellant aggrieved by the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer in respect of the lands acquired for the purpose of formation of National Highway Bye-pass Road, filed the said L.A.O.P. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondent. 3. 2 4. Pursuant to the Notification dated 14.8.1992 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of the land for the purpose of formation of National Highway Bye-pass Road, an extent of Acs.73.62 cents of land in different Survey Numbers of Nellore Bit II Village of Nellore Mandal was acquired. The land of an extent of Ac.0.12 cents in Survey No.777-1 and an extent of Ac.0.51 cents in Survey No.627-B2 situate in Nellore Bit II belonged to the original appellant was part of acquisition. Draft declaration was published on 24.8.1992. The Land Acquisition Officer during the Award enquiry classified the acquired land into three categories: (I) House plots, (II) Agriculture lands under paddy cultivation and garden lands, and (III) Waste lands, and fixed the market value for category I lands @ Rs.85,000/- per acre, category II lands @ Rs.65,000/- per acre, and category III lands @ Rs.50,000/- per acre. The appellant-claimant received the compensation under protest and sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking enhancement/ fixation of market value @ Rs.200/- per Sq.yard. Before the Reference Court, the appellant-claimant was examined as P.W.1 and the Referring Officer was examined as R.W.1. documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the claimant. A copy of the Award No.9/93-94 in Rc.No.A/143/90, dated 28.2.1994 was marked Ex.B.1. At the time of considering the matter, the learned Reference Court formulated the following points for consideration; a) Whether the market value of the acquired lands of claimant in this case fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer was not on par with prevailing market rate at that vicinity as on the date of publication of Notification under Section 4(1) of L.A. Act? b) If so, the said Market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer shall be enhanced? c) If so at what rate? 5. No as 3 6. In the Reference Court, it was inter alia contended that the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is not correct and that at the time of acquisition it was not less than Rs.200/- per Sq.yard and that Basic Value Register shows the market value of the land in that vicinity ranges from Rs.200/- to Rs.500/- per Sq.yard as on the date of Section 4(1) Notification and the present market value of the acquired land is The learned Reference Court after about Rs.1,500/- per Sq.yard. considering the matter more particularly with reference to Ex.B.1 Award, made the following observations: "... Thus, the evidence on record clearly discloses that Ac.0.51 cents of land of claimant covered by S.No.627/B2 was in the same position as that of his other 12 cents of land acquired under the same Award covered by S.No.777/1 as the lands near and around said Ac.0.51 cents was also converted into house plots and sold as small bits as house-plots even long prior to initiation of acquisition Proceedings for formation of National Highway Bye-pass Road. Simply because the said 51 cents of land had been cultivated on the date of Notification, it does not mean that it was not fit for house-plots and there was demand for house plots in that locality. As mentioned earlier, Ex.B.1 award itself shows that there was demand for house-plots and the land in that locality was being converted into house-plots. Therefore, the learned Land Acquisition Officer is not justified in including Ac.0.51 cents of the claimant’s land covered by S.No.627/B2 under category No.1 i.e., agricultural land and he ought to have considered the potentiality of the said land as it is situated at the locality where several lands were converted into house-plots and sold such plots as house-plots.” When it comes to fixation of the market value, the learned Reference Court though referred the sale transactions in Ex.BI Award dated 28.2.1994, uniformly fixed the market value of the subject matter lands under category I (Ac.0.12 cents) and category II (Ac.0.51 cents) @ Rs. 1,00,000/- against the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer for category I lands @ Rs.85,000/- and category II lands @ Rs.65,000/- per acre. 7. 4 The leaned counsel for the appellant inter alia contends that the learned Reference Court was not justified in fixing the market value @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre, having come to the conclusion that the subject matter lands are fit for house-plots and there is a demand for the house-plots in the subject matter localities. He submits that the learned Reference Court considered the potentiality of the subject matter land, as it is situated in the locality where several lands were already converted into house-plots. Drawing the attention of this Court to Ex.B.1 Award, learned counsel further contends that the Award discloses that in the same Survey number i.e.. Survey No.627/A, vide sale transaction dated 16.1.1992 was in respect of Ac.0.7614 ankanams was sold for a sum of Rs.61,200/- i.e., Rs.3,22,666/- per acre and the sale deed dated 22.5.1992 is in respect of the land an extent of 33i/3 ankanams of plot in Sy.No.777 etc., sold for a sum of Rs.26,700/- which works out to Rs.4,84,605/- per acre. He submits that despite the sale transactions, which are prior to the date of Section 4(1) Notification dated 14.8.1992, the Land Acquisition Officer had not taken the said transactions into consideration and fixed a meager sum towards market value. He submits that though the learned Reference Court had taken note of the above said transactions, without assigning any cogent reasons and without any valid basis, confined the market value @ Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. He submits that at present the market value is very high and the City of Nellore developed manifold and the market value claimed by the appellant was in fact much less. Making the said submissions, the learned counsel seeks to allow the appeal. 8. 9. Mr.T.S.Rayalu, learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, made submissions to sustain the order under appeal, the learned Reference Court taking into consideration the overall circumstances, was right in fixing the market value and the same is just He submits that 5 and reasonable. He urges for dismissal of the appeal while contending that the sale exemplars of small extents of land cannot be taken into account when huge extents of land is acquired. This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties. 10. Perused the material on record and gone through the order under 11. Appeal. On consideration of the rival contentions, the point that arise for adjudication is “Whether the compensation fixed by the Reference Court calls for enhancement, in the facts and circumstances of the case?” 12. 13. At the outset, it may be appropriate to mention that there is dispute with regard to the extent of land acquired from the appellant / claimant and passing of Award Ex.BI dated 28.02.1994, in respect of the land under acquisition. As per the said Award the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value in respect of the subject matter lands i.e., Ac.0-12 cents and Ac.0-51 cents situated in Sy.Nos.777-1 and 627/B2 situated in Nellore, Bit-ll village of Nellore Mandal at Rs.85,000/- and Rs.65,000/- per acre respectively. Whereas, according to the appellant/ claimant, the acquired land is situated in the midst of residential houses in Nellore Town, being used as house sites and adjacent lands are sold for house sites at the rate of not less than Rs.200/- per square yard. Claiming the said rate, the appellant while receiving the compensation as fixed by the LAO under protest invoked Section 18 of the Act. no Before the Reference Court, to substantiate his claim, the appellant himself examined as PW 1, but did not choose to adduce any documentary evidence. On behalf of the Referring Officer, RW 1 14. was (Present LAO) was examined and a copy of the Award dated 28.02.1994 was marked as Ex.B1. The appellant / claimant in his evidence stated that the land under acquisition is situated in the heart of Nellore Town and there are houses on all sides of the subject matter land; not justified in treating the land in Sy.No.627-B2 as agricultural land. In his evidence he stated that the acquired land was at high level and there and the LAO is was a demand for house sites. He deposed that as per the Basic Value Register the market value of the lands in the vicinity ranges from Rs.200/- to rs.500/- per sq.yard, as on the date of Section 4 (1) Notification, juncture, it may be appropriate to mention here that At this as per the learned counsel for the appellant, the value of the land, in view of its location, is very high, but the appellant has confined it to Rs.200/- However, except the appellant/PW 1. no other independent witness was examined in support of the claim made by the appellant. No documentary evidence was adduced, though it was stated that the lands in the vicinity / adjacent to the acquired lands fetches Sq.yard. Be that as it may. per sq.yard. more than Rs.200/- per 15. From a perusal of Ex.BI Award dated 28.02.1994, it is clear that the LAO had taken into account about 47 sale transactions, which took place three years prior to the issuance of Section 4 (1) Notification 14.08.1992, for determining the market value in respect of the lands under acquisition. Serial Nos.23, 24, 25 sale transactions with to which the LAO fixed the market value of the subject matter lands relates to sale of small extents of lands i.e., Ac.0-80 cents @ Rs.64,000/-, which works out to Rs.80,000/- per acre. Whereas, Serial No.37 relates to sale transaction dated 16.01.1992, wherein an extent of 76/2 ankanams in Sy.No.627/A was sold for Rs.61,200/-, which works out to Rs.3,22,666/- per acre. Serial No.44 relates to a sale transaction wherein an extent of 33/2 ankanams situated in Sy.No.717/1-1 etc., (including dated reference 7 Sy.No.777) was sold for Rs.26,700/-, which works out to Rs.4,84,605/- per acre. It may be appropriate to reiterate here that the acquired lands of the appellant are situated in Sy.No.627-B2 and Sy.No.777/1. When sale transactions which are much prior to Section 4 (1) Notification dated 14.08.1992 are available, the LAO instead of taking the same into consideration, took the sale transactions in respect of the Sy.Nos.621/A and 621/B, which is not just or tenable. 16. The learned Reference Court, in the order under challenge observed that there is no dispute that the house site value near and around Nellore Town for the past so many years has been increased abnormally on account of increasing tendency of urbanization and that there is no dispute that the land situated near and around the acquired lands of the claimant / appellant were being converted into house plots ever since long prior to acquisition of lands, including lands of claimant for formation of National Highway Bye-pass road. Referring to sale transactions at Sy.Nos.37 and 44, it categorically held that the market value of the acquired lands of the appellant - claimant as fixed by the LAO as on the date of Section 4(1) Notification was not on par with prevailing market rate and the same has to be enhanced to meet the ends of justice. However, it had randomly enhanced the compensation in respect of the subject matter lands from Rs.85,000/- per acre and Rs.65,000/- per acre to Rs.1,00,000/- per acre uniformly. No reasons were assigned for such enhancement, which in the considered opinion of this Court is not just or reasonable, more particularly, in the light of the sale transactions, which are referred to by the learned Reference Court. There is nothing on record contradicting the sale transactions dated 16.01.1992 and 22.05.1992 referred to in the Ex.BI Award, much less the genuineness of the same to the effect that the rate of the land was boosted in order to claim more compensation in respect of the acquired 8 lands. In the absence of the same, this Court see no reason as to why such sale transactions cannot be taken into consideration for fixation of the market value. There is yet another reason to take the said transactions into consideration. As seen from the Award-Ex.B1, the basic value of the land per sq. yard is reflected in Col.No.8, which is Rs.100/- per Sq. yard. Almost all the sale transactions referred to in Ex.B1 Award were in respect of small extents of lands, which are sold in Ankanams. At this stage, it may be relevant to state that 605 Ankanams are equivalent to one acre and one Ankanam is equivalent to 8 Sq.yards. When several extents of lands as reflected in the sale transactions pertain to sale of land in Sq.yards, this Court see no justification on the part of the LAO as also the learned Reference court in fixing the market value on acreage basis instead of square yard basis. However, when small extents of lands are considered as comparable sales in respect of the huge extents of lands, it is settled law that appropriate deductions ought to be made. In Horrmal (Deceased) through his LRs and others v State of Haryana & Others^ the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, inter alia, held that the sale exemplars in respect of the small extents of land can be 17. taken into consideration for fixation of market value depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case. It, however, observed that appropriate deductions which may even go up to 80% can be made. In the light of the said decision, the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader merits no appreciation. 18. Though the learned Government Pleader sought to sustain the order under Appeal, in the light of the conclusions arrived at supra, the same warrants interference. Further, the conclusion of the learned Reference Court that there is no convincing material to accept that the MANU/SC/1134/2024 9 market value of the acquired lands was more than Rs.1,00,000/-, in the light of the sale transactions referred to in the Award, is not tenable. As noted earlier the learned Reference Court recorded findings inter alia to the effect that the land of the appellant of an extent of Ac.0-51 cents covered by Sy.No.627-B2 was in the same position as that of his other Ac.0-12 cents of land acquired under the same Award covered by Sy.No.777/1 and the LAO ought to have considered the potentiality of the said land, which is situated in a locality where several lands are covered into house plots and sold as such. Nothing contrary was argued to upset the said findings / conclusions recorded by the learned Reference Court. However, this Court in the light of the conclusions arrived at supra, is required to fix a just and reasonable compensation, though the appellant/claimant has not filed any documentary evidence. As observed earlier, in the Award the basic value of the land situated in Sy.No.627/A and 777 was mentioned as Rs.100/- per Sq.Yard. Keeping in view the potentiality of the lands under acquisition as house sites and in the light of the settled legal position, the deductions have to be made towards development charges. Accordingly, the point is answered and the value of the subject matter land is determined as follows: 19. Total extent acquired Market value Total value = Ac.0-63 cents i.e., 3048.92 Sq.yards = Rs.100/-perSq.yard = Rs.3,04,892/- (Rs.4,83,955/- per acre) In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the market value in respect of the subject matter land is fixed @ Rs.100/- per square yard i.e., Rs.4,83,955/- per acre and 1/3'"^ shall be deducted for development charges / amenities. The appellant is entitled to all the statutory benefits on the market value so fixed, from the date of Section 4 (1) Notification. 20. 10 21. Consequently, the Miscellaneous Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGIS^TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nellore, SPSR Nellore District. (With records) 2. One CC to Sri M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, 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 BSV nm HIGH COURT DATED:24/04/2025 JUDGMENT AND DECREE LAAS.No.850 of 2006 ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN PART WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 850 OF 2006 Between: 1. Band! Venkata Ramana Reddy (Died per LR 2"'* Appellant), S/o.Sangi Reddy, Hindu, Land Owner, R/o.3/349, Lakshmipuram, Nellore. 2. Bandi Sangi Reddy, S/o.Late Bandi Venkata Ramana Reddy, aged about 58 years, R/o.3/349, Laxmipuram, Nellore. Appellant is brought on record as LR of deceased sole appellant as per the Court Order, dated 11-09-2014 made in LAASMP.758 of 2014.) nd (2 ...Claimant/Appellant AND The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Nellore. ...Respondent/Respondent Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the Judgment and Decree, dated 07-03-2006 passed in LAOP.No.19 of .1997 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District. 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 M.S.R.Chandra Murthy, Advocate for Appellant and of Sri T.S.Rayalu, Government Pleader for Appeals/Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE: 1. That the Appeal be and is hereby allowed in part; That the market value in respect of the subject matter land be and is hereby fixed @ Rs.lOO/- per square yard i.e., Rs.4,83,955/- per acre; That 1/3^^ shall be deducted for development charges/amenities; That the appellant be and is hereby entitled to all the statutory benefits on the market value so fixed, from the date of Section 4 (1) Notification; 2. 3. 4. and 5. That there be no order as to costs in this Appeal. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nellore, SPSR Nellore District. 2. Three CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:24/04/2025 DECREE LAAS.No.850 of 2006 2 6 iUN 2025 m ^ Current Socnon, ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN PART WITHOUT COSTS