IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No : 55 OF 2019 Between: 1. Rajula Penchala Reddy S/o Narasimha Reddy (C.1) aged 65 years, R/o. Kollapanaidupalli Village, Chejarla Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 2. Sk. Khaja Hussain S/o Ramthu Saheb (C.2. died) (His LR is shown as appellant No. 18) 3. Gajula Lakshmaiah S/o Penchalaiah (C.3) aged 77 years, R/o. Kattumudipalli Village, Sydapuram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 4. Narla Venkateswarlu S/o Venkata Narasa Reddy (C.4) aged 55 years, R/o. Ramnagar Village, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 5. Boreddy Penchalanarasa Reddy (G.5.died) (His LR is shown as appellant No. 19) 6. Rajula Penchal Reddy S/o Narasa Reddy (C.6 died) (His LR. is shown as appellant No. 20) 7. Gadi Krishnaiah S/o Ramanaiah (C.7) aged 52 years, R/o. Vidavaluru Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 8. Rajula Rami Reddy S/o Narapa Reddy (C.8) aged 70 years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 9. Peramakonda Malleswaraiah S/o Mallaiah (C.9) aged 53 years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District Narla Rosi Reddy (C.10 died) (His LRs are on record as Claimant No’s. 16 & 17) Rajula Venkatateswara Reddy, S/o Narasa Reddy (C.11), aged 55 R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 10. 11. years Shaik Kalesha S/o Mahaboob Saheb (C.12) aged 70 years, R/o. Dachur Villagev Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Yanamala Venkata Subba Rdddy (C. 13. died) ^ (Hi^LR. i$ shown as appellant No. 21) Tummala Anki Reddy, S/o Penchala Reddy (C.14, aged 72 years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Shaik Ramthu Saheb S/o Hussain Saheb (C.15) (died) (His LRs. are shown as appellant No. 22 & 23) Narla Lakshmamma, W/o Rosi Reddy, (C.16) aged Thogataveedhi, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Narla Ratna Reddy, S/o Rosi Reddy, (C.17) aged 60 Thogataveedhi, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 12. 13. 14, 15. 16. 85 years, R/o. 17. years, R/o. ...Appeliants/Claimants. years, R/o. 18. Shaik Rasul, S/o Khaja Hussain (LR of C.2), aged 45 Auduruplli Village, Chejarla Mandal; SPSR Nellore District. 19. Boreddy Penda penchalaswamy, S/o Narasareddy (LR of C.5) @Penchalanarasareddy, aged 48 years, R/o. Dachuru Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District 20. Rajula Penchalaswamy, S/o Penchala Reddy (LR of C.6) aged 55 R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Yanamala Chandrareddy (LR of C.13) S/o Venkatasubbareddy aged years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Shaik Rafi S/o Ramthu Saheb (LR of C.15) aged 45 years, R/o. Kothuru Village, Nellore Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Shaik Nayab S/o Ramthu Saheb (LR of C.15) aged 39 years, R/o. Tailors colony, Podalakur Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District years. 21. 73 22. 23. [Petitioner No 18 to 23 are brought on record as LRs of deceased claimant No. 2,5,6,13, and 15 vide court order dt 27.03.2025 in lA No 3/2019] ....Appellants/Proposed LRs of C. No’s. 2, 5, 6, 13 & 15 AND 24. The Special Deputy Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore. ...Respondent/Referring Officer Acquisition Act, Aggrieved by the 1 Judge, Gudur, dated 1-4-2002 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land decree and common order of the Senior Civil passed in LAOP No. 130/1993. This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds appeal, the Order and Decree of the Lower Court, petition and of and material papers in the Sreenivas, for the upon hearing arguments of Sri Chetiuru Appellants, and GP for Appeals, for the Respondent. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Appeal be and hereby is Allowed; 2. That the compensation for each follows tree be and hereby is enhanced as a. Pomegranate trees b. Orange trees c. Mango tree d. Palmyra trees 3. That the appellant shall compensation amount' Rs.3,000/- per tree Rs.4,000/- per tree Rs.3,000/-per tree Rs.300/- per tree pay the Court fee on the enhanced 4. That the appellant Is not entitled to interest during the period preferring the appeal after disposal Court; 5. That there be of delay in of the L.A.O.P by the Reference no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTER //TRUE COPY// ON OFFICER To. 1. The Civil Judge [Senior Division]. Guduru 2. Three CD Copies , SPSR Nellore District RAM HIGH COURT DATED: 01/05/2025 DECREE LAAS.No.55 of 2019 ALLOWING THE LAAS WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No : 55 OF 2019 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, Aggrieved by the decree and common order of the Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, dated 1-4-2002 passed LAOP No. 130/1993. in Between: 1. Rajula Penchala Reddy S/o Narasimha Reddy (C.1) aged 65 Kollapanaidupalli Village, Chejarla Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 2. Sk. Khaja Hussain S/o Ramthu Saheb (C.2. died) (His LR is shown as appellant No 18) 3. Gajula Lakshmaiah S/o Penchalaiah (C.3) aged 77 years, R/o. Kattumudipalli Village, Sydapuram Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 4. Narla Venkateswarlu S/o Venkata Narasa Reddy (C.4) aged 55 Ramnagar Village, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 5. Boreddy Penchalanarasa Reddy (C.5.died) (His LR is shown as appellant No. 19) 6. Rajula Penchal Reddy, S/o Narasa Reddy (C.6 died) (His LR. is shown as appellant No. 20) 7. Gadi Krishnaiah, S/o Ramanaiah (C.7) aged 52 years, R/o. Vidavaluru Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 8. Rajula Rami Reddy,S/o Narapa Reddy (C.8) aged 70 Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. years, R/o. years, R/o. years, R/o. Dachur JO- 9. Peramakonda Malleswaraiah, S/o Mallaiah (C.9) aged 53 years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District Narla Rosi Reddy (C.10 died) (His LRs are on record as Claimant No’s. 16 & 17) Rajula Venkatateswara Reddy, S/o Narasa Reddy (C.11), aged 55 R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Shaik Kalesha, S/o Mahaboob Saheb (C.12) aged 70 years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Yanamala Venkata Subba Reddy (C. 13. died) (His LR. is shown as appellant No. 21) Tummala Anki Reddy, S/o Penchala Reddy (C.14, aged 72 years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal,'SPSR Nellore District. Shaik Ramthu Saheb S/o Hussain Saheb (C.15) (died) (His LRs. are shown as appellant No. 22 & 23) Narla Lakshmamma, W/o Rosi Reddy, (C.16) aged 85 Thogataveedhi, Podalakur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Narla Ratna Reddy, S/o Rosi Reddy, (C.17) aged 60 Thogataveedhi, Podalakur Mandat, SPSR Nellore District 10. 11. years 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. years, R/o. 17. years, R/o. ...Appellants/Claimants, years, R/o. 18. Shaik Rasul, S/o Khaja Hussain (LR of C.2), aged 45 Auduruplli Village, Chejarla Manual; SPSR Nellore District. Boreddy Penda penchalaswamy, S/o Narasareddy (LR of C.5) @Penchalanarasareddy, aged 48 years, R/o. Dachuru Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District Rajula Penchalaswamy, S/o Penchala Reddy (LR of C.6) aged 55 R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Yanamala Chandrareddy (LR of C.13) S/o Venkatasubbareddy aged years, R/o. Dachur Village, Kaluvay Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. Shaik Rafi S/o Ramthu Saheb (LR of C.15) aged 45 Village, Nellore Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 19. 20. years. 21. 73 22. years, R/o. Kothuru Shaik Nayab S/o Ramthu Saheb (LR of C.15) aged 39 years, R/o. Tailors colony, Podalakur Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. [Petitioner No 18 to 23 are brought on record as LRs of deceased claimant No. 2,5,6,13, and 15 vide court order dated 27.03.2025 in lA No 3/2019] 23. ....Appellants/Proposed LRs of C. No’s. 2, 5, 6,13 & 15 AND 24. The Special Deputy Collector, Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore. ...RESPONDENT/REFERRING OFFICER Counsel for the Appellants: SRI CHETLURU SREENIVAS Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR APPEALS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SR! JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No. 55 OF 2019 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 tow 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.130 of 1993 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 confirming the compensation paid for fruit bearing plants and other trees. 2. Dissatisfied with the compensation granted to the appellants for Pomegranate, Orange and Palmyra trees vide order in L.A.O.P.No.130 of 1993 on the file of the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, dated 01.04.2002, the present L.A.A.S.No.55 of 2019 came to be filed seeking enhancement of the compensation of the trees. 2 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.3,000/- 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 same orders in the present appeal. ; 3. 4. The appeJIants 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, •t 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 Vs. 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 5r tamarind and soap-nut are concerned, the Court has fixed Rs.6,000/- and Rs.5,000/- respectively for each tree. ■ 5. 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 Collector(O. A.f dated 20.11.2018, inter alia held as follows: “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 been granted 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 in the year 1994. Having regard to the entire facts and 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 are disposed of with the following directions: The appellants shall be entitled to compensation at the rate 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 delay in approaching this Court or the High Court. The compensation to the claimants shall be made within three months from today.” (i) (ii) (iii) In the judgment rendered in LAAS No.417 of 2008, a Division 6. 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 In Civil Appeal No.2947 of 2022, the Hon’ble Apex Court has 7. fixed compensation for the pomegranate trees @ Rs.3,000/- per tree. following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in D.Eswara Naidu & 5 ■I r ors Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (LA.) (referred supra), in Civil Appeal No. 11355 of 2018 in respect of the very'same project. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals has relied on the 8. judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Ashok Kumar and another Us. 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. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals further stated that the 9. 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. In the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in D.Eswara Naidu & 10. 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 6 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 and Mango trees. In respect of Orange and Palmyra in LAAS No.417of 2008, the compensation was fixed @ Rs.4,000/- and Rs.300/- per tree respectively. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals has disputed about the 11. 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 Court. 7 12. As the claim is only with regard to the trees, the present appeal is allowed, enhancing the compensation for each tree as detailed below: Pomegranate trees Orange trees Mango trees Palmyra trees Rs.3,000/- per tree Rs.4,000/- per tree Rs.3,000/- per tree Rs. 300/- 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 //TRUE COPY// SEerroN officer To, 1. The Civil Judge [Senior Division], Guduru records if any] 2. One CC to Sri Chetiuru Sreenivas, Advocate [OPUC] 4 Th« GP for Appeals, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Amafava^ High Court of Andhra Pradesh at ™rd!s?atAma“vati "'"3' 6. Three CD Copies SPSR Nellore District [with MV RAM HIGH COURT DATED; 01/05/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE LAAS.No.55 of 2019 ALLOWING THE LAAS WITHOUT COSTS