C. Hanumandloo, Nizamabad Dist And 5 ORS v. The La Officer, Nizamabad.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA AC UISITIO APPEAL NO: 470 Appeal Under Section 54 of L.A. Act against the Judgment and Decree dated 18.11.2004 in O.P.No.863 0f 1994 0n the file of the court of the I Additional District Judge at Nizamabad.
Between:
1. Chulla Hanumandloo, S/o Hanmandlu, aged 47 years,
2. B. Narasaiah, S/o Limbanna, aged 47 yearc'
3. B. Rajanna, S/o Gopal, aged 52 years,
4. N. Rajalingu, S/o Pedda Rajalingu, aged 58 years,
5. Hamshetti Nagubai, Wo Narsimlu, aged 47 years'
6. Neelam Gangubai, W/o Neelam Yerra Gangaram, aged 42 years' All are Fl/o Bheemgal (K) Village of Bheemgal (M), Nizamabad District' ...APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS AND The Land Acquisition Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad. ...RESPONDENT/RFEFENCER Counsel for the Appellants: SRI V' MANOHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent: THE GOW. PLEADER FOR APPEALS (TG) The Court delivered the following: JUDGMENT
TI{E HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO AND THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P.SREE SUDHA L.A.A.S.No.470 of 2OO5 JUDGMENT: lPer Hon'ble Sri Justice P. Naueen Raol Heard Sri V. Manohar Rao, learned counsel for the appellants, and learned Government Pieader for Appeals.
2.
For the purpose of construction of bridge on BheemgalIndalwai road, land acquisition process was initiated affecting the land of the appellants to an extent of Ac.l.25% guntas in Survey Nos.241, 253, 150, 151, 1320 and 1322 of Bheemgal (B&R) Village. Ac.O.16 gunt.\s is single crop wet land and Ac.O.O9Yz guntas is dry land. By award dated 17 .O8.1994, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed Rs. 16,000/- per acre for single crop wet land and Rs.12,000/- per acre for dry land. Not satisfied with the said determination of the land value, the appellants sought reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The said reference was numbered as O.P.No.863 of 1994 on the frle of I Additional District Judge at Nizamabad.
. By order dated 18. ll.2OO4, the Reference Courr enhanced the market value to Rs.21,000/- per acre for single crop wet land and Rs.18,000/- per acre for dry land with additions which include solatium, interest etc. Not satisfied with the said enhancement, this appeal is preferred.
3.
According to learned counsel for the appellants, concerning the acquisition of land in Mothe Village, which forms part of the Zone - B Taluk, the land owners_ preferred A.S.No.24g2 ol 1gg9 and A.S.No.1431 of 1996 before this court. This Court, having considered the matter in detail, found that the market value
J.
determined by the Land Acquisition Officer and by the Reference Court was inadequate and the same was not correct and determined t..
the value at Rs.15/- per sq yard' According to learned counsel' though appellants placed reliance on this judgment' the same was not even looked into by the Reference Court' He further submits that as compared to Mothe Village' Bheemgal is the Mandal headquarters and has been the headquarters for Taluk for a long time and therefore the value of the land in Taluk headquarters can be higher than the land value in Mothe Village Therefore' the reasoning assigned by this Court in granting higher compensatlon ought to have been applied' while determining the market value of the land in issue. He further submits that the Reference Court has not appreciated the transactions that took place in the adjacent land and the same is not valid in law learned Government Pleader' Mothe Village IS 4.
According to away from Bheemgal Village and therefore the 6 to 7 kilometers Mothe Village cannot be the basis to seek 1n valuation of land enhancement of comPensation for the land in Bheemgal Village' As seen from the order of the Reference Court' the Reference Court considered the value of the adjoining lands to increase the market value and compensation and there is no error committed by the Reference Court warranting interference by this Court' 5.
Except placing reliance on the decision of this Court and two appeal suits relating to acquisition of land in Mothe Viilage' there is no other material ptaced before this Court to dislodge the Iinding arrived at bY the Reference Court'
6.
Though learned counsel for the appellants sought to contend that the decision of this Court in A.S.No.2482 of 1989 was not considered, from the reading of the order, it is seen that the Reference Court has noted the decisions, but having regard to other mateiial placed o'n record, the Court has not taken into consideration the reasoning assigned by this Court to enhance the market value of land in Mothe Vi11age. Admittedly, Mothe Village is 6 to 7 kilometers away from Bheemgal Viliage. Therefore, there i cannot be a comparison of the value of the land in a village away by 6 to 7 kilometers.
7.
Leaving that aside, the appellants placed reliance on the sale transaction of piece of land of about 845 sq. yards sold for Rs.25,400/- which comes to Rs.1,45,840/- per acre, This was a solitary transaction and the Reference Court found that the value of the land reflected in the sale transaction of the year 1990 appears to be a fancy price. The Court evaluated the evidence brought on record. The Reference Court noticed that there were documents brought on record, which disclose far lower market value in the transactions. However, having noted that even though Ex.B1 concerns sale transaction of Ac.O.16 guntas of single crop wet land in Survey No.932, dated 17.06.1999 disclosing the value of the land at Rs.22,000/- per acre, the same was ignored and serial Nos.25 and 52 sale transactions were also ignored without assigning reasons and having found that those transactions were the last and near to the land acquired, the Reference Court agreed to enhance the market value to that of Rs. 18,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.21,000/- per acre for single crop wet land.
\ 58.
Having regard to the evidence brought on record, as evaluated by the Reference Court, and in the absence of any other material to dislodge the view taken by the Reference Court, we do not see any error in the manner in which the issue was considered and market value was determined by the Reference Court that warrants interference. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed' Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed.
SD/.K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR ig SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// \ To,
1. The I Additional District Judge' Nizamabad'N2amabad District' Z. One CC to Sri V Manohar Rao, Advocate tOl'UU-l
5. iffi Ed.']" t" cJrt. FrJloLi tlI Ap-pLars, Higr' court for the state of Telangana at Hvderabad. [OUT] Two'CD CoPies One Spare CoPY sbr
HIGH COURT DATED: 0811112021 1 'r S e tZ q :)oo c!
$4 0Es$tl A1 t) gq , \
JUDGMENT
LAAS.No.470 of 2005 DISMISSING THE APPEAL 7Du t l l
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYOERABAD IVONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTIGE P.SREE SUDHA LAND ACQUISITIO N FIRST APPEAL NO: 470 OF 200s Between:
1. Chulla Hanumandloo, S/o Hanmandlu, aged 47 years, 2.8 3.8 4.N Narasaiah, S/o Limbanna, aged 47 years, Rajanna, S/o Gopal, aged 52 years, Rajal,ingu, S/o Pedda Rajalingu, aged 58 years,
5. Hamshetti Nagubai, W/o Narsimlu, aged 47 years,
6. Neelam Gangubai, W/o Neelam Yerra Gangaram, aged 42 years, All are Fl/o Bheemgal (K) Village of Bheemgal (M), Nizamabad District .APPELLANTS/CLAIMANTS AND The Land Acquisition Officer, Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad. ...RESPONDENT/RFEFENCER Appeal Under section 54 of L.A. Act against the Judgment and Decree of the Court of the I Additional District Judge at Nizamabad in O.P.No.863 of 1994' oRDER: This appeal coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grounds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the material papers in the suit and upon hearing the arguments of sri v. Manohar Rao, Advocate for the Appellant and of i the Govt. Pleader for Appeals, for the Respondent. This Court doth order and decree as follows:
1. That the Judgment and decree of the court of the I Additional District Judge at Nizamabad in o.p.No.gos of 1994 dated 18.11.2004 be and hereby is confirmed, and the apPeal is dismissed.
2. That there be no order as to Costs in the appeal' SD/-K.SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY/'
tl,r.
SECTION OFFICER To . The I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District . Two CD Copies . One Spare CoPY br a s
HIGH COURT DATED: 0811112021 DECREE LAAS.No.470 of 2005 DISMISSING THE APPEAL t r1