IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMA O’ 11^1 THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY ll§L TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA O. AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NQ: 75 OF 2019 RAO Between: 1. Shaik Anke Saheb, (C.4 died) ( C.11 No.4 ) 2. Shaik Basha Saheb, S/o Anke Saheb ‘ Podalakur Village, Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 3. Kethu Subbamma, W/o Ramana Reddy (C.10) aged about 68 years, R/o Regadapalli Village, Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore 4. Shaik Peeramma, W/o Anke Saheb (C,11) aged about 80 years, R/o Podalakur Village, and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 5. Shaik Basha Saheb, S/o Anke Saheb Podalakur Village, and Mandal, SPSR Nellore and C.12 are added as L.Rs of Cl. (C.5 ) aged about 56 years, R/o District. (C.12) aged about 56 years, R/o District. ...APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS AND 1. The Special Deputy Collector (LA), Telugu Ganga Project Nellore. 2. Kethu Penchala Reddy, S/o Narapa Reddy (C , Rapur at •1) 3. Kethu China Malta Reddy, S/o Narasa Reddy (C.2) 4. Kethu Chandra Reddy, S/o Ramachandrareddy (C.3) 5. Vehnapusa Padmamma, W/o Eswara Reddy (C.6) 6. Pathipati Narasapa Naidu, S/o Pitchi Naidu (C.7) 7. Vaddineni Venkataramanaidu (C.8), Eswara Reddy (C.6) 8. Revuru Prameelamma, W/o Hazarath Reddy (C.9) (Respondents 2 to 8 are not necessary parties) ...RESPONDENTS/ CLAIMANTS Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, dated 05.10.2012 passed in LAOP No. 1 of 1993. 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 Chetiuru Sreenivas, for the Appellants, and GP for Appeals, for the Respondents. THIS COURT DOTH ORDER AND DECREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the Appeal be and hereby is Allowed; 2. That the compensation for each tree be and hereby is enhanced as follows a. Lime trees b. Sweet Orange(Cheeni) Trees c. Jamberi trees d. Drumstick-1 e. Tamarind tree Rs.3,000/- per tree Rs.4,000/- per tree Rs.3,00/- per tree Rs.2,000/- per tree Rs.6,000/- per tree 3. That the appellant shall compensation amount; 4. That the appellant is not entitled to interest during the period of delay L.A.O.P by the pay the Court fee on the enhanced in preferring the appeal after disposal of the Reference Court' 5. That there be no order as to costs in this appeal. Sd/- E. KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTfbN OFFICER To. 1. The Civil Judge [Senior Division], Guduru, SPSR 2. Three CD Copies Nellore District MV RAM HIGH COURT DATED; 01/05/2025 DECREE LAAS.No.75 of 2019 ALLOWING THE LAAS WITHOUT COSTS IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY A TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE o ® -0 91 yo Jk PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO LAND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT NO: 75 OF 2019 Appeal filed under section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Gudur, passed in LAOP.No. 1 of 1993. Between: dated 05.10.2012 1. Shaik Anke Saheb, (C.4 died) ( C.11 and C.12 No.4) 2. Shaik Basha Saheb, S/o Anke Saheb (C.5 ) aged about Podalakur Village, Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 3. Kethu Subbamma, W/o Ramana Reddy (C.10) aged Regadapalli Village, Rapur Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 4. Shaik Peeramma, W/o Anke Saheb (C.11) aged Podalakur Village, and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. 5. Shaik Basha Saheb, S/o Anke Saheb (C.12) aged Podalakur Village, and Mandal, SPSR Nellore District. are added as L.Rs of Cl. 56 years, R/o about 68 years, R/o about 80 years, R/o about 56 years, R/o ...APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS AND 1. The Special Deputy Collector (LA), Telugu Ganga Project, Rapur at Nellore' 2. Kethu Pench^la Reddy, S/o Narapa Reddy (C.1) 3. Kethp Chir>a Malla Reddy, S/o Narasa Reddy (C.2) 4. Kethu Chandra Reddy, S/o Ramachandrareddy (C.3) 5. Vennapusa Padmamma, W/o Eswara Reddy (C.6) 6. Pathipati Narasapa Naidu, S/o Pitchi Naidu (C.7) 7. Vaddineni Venkataramanaidu (C.8), Eswara Reddy (C.6) 8. Revuru Prameelamma, W/o Hazarath Reddy (C.9) (Respondents 2 to 8 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 Judgment: X,. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO I AND ACQUISITION APPEAL SUIT No. 75 OF 2019 THE JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya) The land of the claimants was acquired by the respondent Project for foreshore submersion of authorities of Telugu Ganga Kandaleru Reservoir. Aggrieved by the fixation of low and small amount appellants-claimants have received the compensation for the trees, the protest and requested to Section 18 of the Land Accordingly, the award was refer the award to the Civil Court under Acquisition Act 1894 (for short the Act), referred and registered as L.A.O.P.No.1 of on of Senior Civil Judge, Guduru. On 1993 on the file of the Court considering the evidence, both oral and documentary, the Reference reference by enhancing the compensation for Court has answered the trees. 2. Dissatisfied with the compensation granted to the appellants, for Orange (Cheeni), Jamberi, drumstick and Tamarind the Lime, Sweet trees vide order in L.A.O.P.No. 1 of 1993 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Guduru, dated 05.10.2012, the present L.A.A.S.No. be filed seeking enhancement of the compensation 75 of 2019 came to of the trees. 2 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit this Court, the composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the Hon’ble Apex Court have fixed the rate for that at Hyderabad 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. 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 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 pomegranate, drumstick and neredu (black-plum), and so far as the trees of 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 Collector(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 been granted compensation at the We find from Civil rate of Rs.2000/- per Pomegranate Tree. 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 Rs.3,000/- per Pomegranate Tree. Therefore, these appeals are disposed of with the following directions; ' 2012(12) see 848 ^ 2019 (13) see 785 4 (i) 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.” (ii) 6. In the judgment rendered in 1_AAS 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/- per tree. following the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in D.Eswara Naidu & ors Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (LA.) (referred supra), in Civil Appeal No. 11355 of 2018 in respect of the very same project. 5 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.Eswara 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 Somasila/Telugu Ganga Project @ Rs.3,000/- as against Rs.2,000/- and held that the appellants are entitled to compensation @ Rs.3,000/- 6 for pomegranate tree along with all statutory benefits and also further observed that every appellant is not entitled to statutory interest for the \ i 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. In respect of Lime, Sweet Orange (Cheeni), Jamberi tree. Drumstick, Tamarind trees in LAAS No.417 of 2008, the compensation was fixed @ Rs.3,000/- Rs.4,000/-, Rs.300/-, Rs.2,000/- and Rs.6,000/- respectively. 11. 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 Court. 7 As the claim is only with regard to the trees, the present appeal is allowed, enhancing the compensation for each tree as detailed below: 12. Rs.3,000/- per tree Lime tree Rs.4,000/- per tree Sweet Orange (Cheeni) trees , Rs. 300/- per tree Jamberi tree Rs.2,000/- per tree Drumstick-1 Rs.6,000/- per tree Tamarind 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// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Civil Judge [Senior Division], Guduru, SPSR Nellore District [with records if any] 2. One CC to Sri Chetiuru Sreenivas, 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. The Section Officer, New filing Section, Civil wing. High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati 6. Three CD Copies MV RAM HIGH COURT 'i DATED: 01/05/2025 JUDGMENT + DECREE LAAS.No.75 of 2019 ^ t 0 JUL 2025 itentSecUoft^^ o Co ALLOWING THE LAAS WITHOUT COSTS