The High Court · 2026

9. Being aggrieved by the order dated. 22.06.20I ) passed by the Reference Court, the LAO has preferred the present App,:, l. V. ST]BMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES: a) Submissions on behalf of the Appellanl:

10. The Learned Govemment pleader for Appeals a tpearing for the appellant contends that the Reference court has erred n enhancing the compensation by relying upon Exs.Al and A2, which pe. ain only to small bits of land, instead of taking into account sale transacti.rr relating to large extents.

11. It is further contended that the Relerence court ou 3ht to have seen that the LAo had rightly fixed the compensarion on rhe [* sis of sale deeds available for the preceding three years, which pertain t,) large extents of land and were, therefore, more comparable.

12. Learned Govemment pleader would further s rbmit that the Reference court has faired to see that the development of the vicinity that 5 AKS,J&YRK&J UlS No.670 201 I took place subsequent to the acquisition, could not have been a valid basis for enhancing the compensation. Further, the Reference Courtenhanced the compensation without any proper basis, and without 'even resorting to permissible guesswork or applying any recognized formula.

13. It was further contended that the Reference Court ought to have appreciated that the lands acquired were agricu ltural in nature, and therefore, sales relating to small house plots could not form part of the comparable sales for hxing the market value.

14. On the basis of the aforesaid submissions, the Learned Government Pleader has prayed that, there being merit in the appeal, the same may be allowed. b) Submissions on behalf of the Respondents:

15. The leamed counsel appearing for the respondents on the other hand submitted that no error not to speak any elror of law could be said to have been committed by the Reference Court in passing the impugned Award. It is submitted that the Reference Court rightly relied upon Exs.Al artd A^2, even though they relate to smaller extents, since they reflected the prevailing market conditions and the potentiality of the acquired lands for use as house sites. The value of small plos constitutes a relevant guiding 6 )4KS.J&YRKR,J L4A-S \tn 57n 2nt t factor, particularly when the acquired lands were abuttir g the main roads and located within a developed Mandal headquarters. 16' The respondents further contended that the LAo hr d erred in rerying upon outdated sale deeds of rarge extents rerating to r ericurtural lands, which did not reflect the t.re and fair market value. The Reference court correctly rejected such sale instances as incomparable. s nce the acquired lands were centrally located, surrounded by schools, a ,inema theatre, a rice mill, and other urban amenities. Further, the Refi: ence Couft was, therefore, justified in considering the surrounding deve opments, as the potentiality of the land for house sites existed even prior rr the acquisition. The lands formed part of a growing township, and dt:. e loprnent in the vicinity was not subsequent in nature but contempor,reous with the acquisition. As such, the Reference Court fixed the c,r npensation on a proper basis, supported by cogent evidence including < ral testimony of PWs I to 3 and documentary evidence in Exs.A t to A3. I r rrrce. the fixation was neither arbitrary nor without basis but rooted in rel able material on record. 17' The respondents further contended that althougJr the rands were described as agricultural in revenue records, their true crriu acter was that of potential house sites, having regard to their advantageous rocation. access \, 1 AKS,J&VRK&J UAS No.670 2011 to roads, and availability of civic amenities. Therefore, the sale transactions of house plots were the proper comparables, and the Reference Court has rightly placed reliance upon them while enhancing the compensation.

18. In such circumstances referred to above, the leamed Counsel for Respondents prayed that there being no merit in the present appeal, the same deserves to be dismissed. VI. ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATTON:

19. Having heard the leamed counsel appearing for the respective parties and having carefully examined the material placed on record, ttre following issues arise for determination in this Appeal: (D Whether the Reference Court was justified in enhancing the market value of the acquired lands? (ii) Whether the enhancement granted is in accordance with law and supported by evidence on record? (iii) To what relief are the claimants entltled? VII. COMPARATIVE STATEMENT O FCOMPENSATION:

20. For better appreciation, the comparative chart of compensation awarded by the LAO and as enhanced by the Reference Court is tabulated below: 8 AKS, J & YRIG. J I-4AS ,Yo 570 20! I SI No I 2 3 Survey No. / Propcrty Extent Acquired s30 Dry/Ac. I - 35 gts 510/l Dry/ Ac. 0-371/z {s 530/t Dry/Ac. 0- 02 % gts Award LAO (Rs. Rs. 6000/- Rs. 6000t- Rs. 6000/- Total Compensation as per Award (Rs ) Enhanced Compensation by Reference Court (Rs. per Sq. yard) li tal ComJr nsation zl er Enhar;ement (R; ) Rs.l I ,250/- Rs.20l- Rs.l.l ,500/- tu. 5,625l- Rs. 20l- Rs. 9( .750,'- Rs. 375l- Rs.20l- Rs ti 150/- Difference (Enhanced - Award) Rs. t,70,250t- Rs. 8s,t25/- Rs. 5,675/- 2l' From the above tabulation and on a careful cor iideration of the evidence, it is manifest that the LAO had adopted a con:;( rvarive approach in fixing the market value. The Reference Court, on tl-r other hand, has taken into account: the location, surroundings and potentiality ol. he lands; and I t. the sale exemplars of the proximate period. VIII. ANALYSI S:

22. The leamed Govemment pleader appearing on ltr: ralf.of appellant submits that the Reference Court erred in enhancing .i e compensation considering Ex.Al and A'2 which pertained only to snr rll bits of. land, whereas the LAO has reried upon the sares relating to rarue .exrents. on the other hand, leamed counsel for the claimants submittiil tr- rt the Rere,rence 9 AKS,J&VRKR,J LAAS No.670 201 I Court was fully justified in placing reliance on Exs.Al and A2. tr was urged that although these documents related to smaller extents, their genuineness has been proved through the evidence of pW2, the vendor, and PW3, the attester. It was further submitted that since the very purpose of acquisition itself was for providing house-sites, transactions relating to house-site plots in the very same village and proximate in point of time constituted the most reliable indicators of market potentiali[2. It was contended thal the LAO had erred in discarding such evidence and relied solely upon large agricultural transactions situated away from habitation, without appreciating the true potential of the acquired lands.

23. Upon consideration, tlfs court is of the view that it is a settled principle of law that when number of sale deeds are not available and documents relating to a smaller extents are proved to be genuine, such documents can validly be relied upon for fixing the market value of even a vast extent of acquired land. tn the present case, the claimants have produced Exs.Al and A2, which pertain to smaller extents, but their genuineness stands established through the testimony of PW.2, the vendor, and PW.3, the attester. These documents, therefore, cannot be disregarded merely on the ground of their limited extent. Therefore, in the absence of several comparable transactions of larger extents, the Reference Court was justified in treating Exs.A I and .A2 as relevant guiding factors, while l0 AKS,J&VRK&J LAAS No 670 201 I harmonizing the same with the larger extent of trans r :tion reflected in Ex. B l, before ultimately fixing the compensation at Rs.llr r/- per sq. yard

24. In Ravinder Kumar Goel v. State of Haryana and otherst, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had an occasion to consider wr:ther transactions relating to smaller extents of tand could be relied upon f c : determining the market value of large acquired tracts. The Apex court while addressing this issue, observed as follows: nand made, it :e Court hctd. gh Oourt was v rates when " 13. Therefore, since we hove already indicated that the i not justified in merely relying on the circular fring the Jlt other evklence was available on the record pursuarrt to the te is necessory for us lo take note as to whelher the Referen committed an error in not relying on the sale exemplars p, respondents without analysing the comparability. The positior, setled that when ktrge extent of lands is acquired and if the : olso -/itr the large a:i.tent is available on record it would be .;r the same if thev are c.omparable transactions. Howeyer, as above, this Court in Atma Singh (supra) has also held that th,t ;ale inslances o_f smaller exlenl-r cannol be ignored. Further, this Court hr. reiteratecl in mon)' cdses thal the sale exemplars for smaller extent can f, t relied upon suQiect to aoprooriate deduction being provided towarar_ development charqg;- 'duced by the of law is u,ell fer to rely on lrectdy noted ale exemplar,

25. The learned Govemment pleader appearing on be t alf of appellant, however, submits that the relerence court failed to s(x that LAo had ' 2023 SCC OnLine SC 147 ARS,J&YRKR,J lllAS No.670 201I rightly fixed the compensation on the basis of sale deeds pertaining to large extents of land within three years preceding the notihcation. On the other hand, leamed counsel for the Claimants contended that the LAO adopted an erroneous method in fixing compensation. It was polnted out that though the LAO relied on sale deeds of larger extents within three years prior to the notihcation, such transactions related only to agricultural lands situated away from habitation and were unsuitable for assessing the true value of the acquired lands. It was further submitted that, since the very purpose of acquisition in the present case was to provide house-sites to the weaker sections, transactions relating to small house-site plots in the same village, as reflected in Exs.Al ard A2, constitute the most relevant and reliable evidence. The claimants further argued that the acquired lands, being centrally located within a developing Mandal headquarters, abutting the maln road and proximate to important towns, possessed high potentiality for residential use, and such potentiality was completely ignored by the LAO while fixing the cornpensation at a meagre amount of Rs.6,000/- per acre.

26. It is pertinent to note that Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 categorically tists out the matters to be considered in determining compensation, and reads as under: . .UtDa st raAaqJlllttt ,puDl dtlt fb uotssassod BuqqJit atDp dtll to 'topa o) aq, ]b pD$D aqJ{o awp )tlt ot puDl rltns.fit padsat u! .(l) uo,D)s -qns ', uottr, s tapun uollocg[11ou aqllo uottD),Hnd dqt lo app dtlt uo4 puD uo Suouawu a) polnd aL!, ro! anp^ p)FDu tpns uo ,unultn ml unluat nd a,rlaq lo atD ary p parDpqDx lunouD uD p)D.tr,) asnt ,{t;tta ut llDtls Uno) aql 'pap!^or. )AoqD sD 'puDt ?41 lo aryD^ Dlrt)w allt ot uot,lppD uI O-I)J 'puol aWlo ,otssassod Suqq stotJa o) aqtlo )u,t )tlt pLtn g uotpas )apun uoqD)Dpap t 7t .[o uoADclnnd aq Jo autu aqt udajvaq punl atqt lo sltJo.ttl aW to uoljrtt t,u,p uo4 Butllnsu ap1/. Duoq (tuo Ji) aBntuop ar.l, .qtl,xls , ntD :aBuDtlc tlc?ts o, lDtuaplru! ({un fi) s;tsuatlra alqDuosDar aqt 'ssaulsnq lo z ttld to a,uaprsat sltq a&uorqc o1 pallatlutot st palsatalut uostad aW 'topa o- ,rtlt tq puol aqtlo uo!,,stnb)D aqt Jb Dudnhas.uot ut li ,{1tq{{ s1t1 to .tauuDttl Dqp tuo u, ' tiqD\owu, )o alqD^our ,findotd tat11o s1t4 Bu.1t.tallo {1sno1n[u1 uotllslnb)D at 1 {o uomat ,Q ,puot aql Io uorss,ssotl Bu|s1u ,^topqlo) atl, lo au! aqt to'p ttsaDv! uostad aqt tq pautolsns (AuDl) aBDuDp atlt .rQtlUno! .silututnt .:puDl Dt o s14 wotl puol qcns &ut .iaslo uosoal tq 'puo1 arylo uotssassod Buryo1 stopalpJ atlt Jo awtl aq1 lo l.,atsatalu, uostad aqt tq pauolsnt^ (tfuo!r) a ouop aqt ,{lptuql .foataqt uotssassod Buplol sropanoJ aqt lo aup aq1 p ,i@l aqt uo aq tow qar1tt saatl n sdott Burpuols,{uo jo Buopl atlt to uosD A'q 'pa$alaw! uosad atq {q pautotsns afiowop aqt ,/tlpuoJas :['t0t,)q)asnp n o1atat11 Bulolat uortDtDpap ,, to! ,1 uotTceg .g lo gg tcy tq patnlllsqns/ [(1) uotltas-qns ,t uotpas npun uottocljfltouJ otll to uoltot. r,\nd aqt lo a@p aW D puq at .[o aryD^ plrDta aW ,Ntg[ 7 6 J t LtlD.taptsuo) olut blDt llDtls pno) aL ,lJy stlll npun pannbco punl nl pap, )AD aq q uoqosuadwoc lo pnowo atlt iluttttutaap u1 (7) uot1osaaduoc Buruluatap u! paraplsuoJ aq q sra Dn .f 2,, i lua 0t9 0.u sYY'l r'Sxluur'sx| .I l3 AKS,J&VRKR,J LAAS No.670 201I Explarntion. In computing the period referred to in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the orfur of any Court shall be excluded.J finserted by Act 68 of 1984, Section 15 (w.e.f 24 9. t984) J (2) In addition to the market value of the land as abow provided, the Court shall in every case award a sum of [thirty per centumJ [Substituted by Act 68 of I 984, Section 15, for " fifteen per centum" (w.e.f, 24.9. l9SQ.l on such market value, in consideration of compulsory nature of the acquisition_"

27. The Honourable Supreme Court in Kapil Mehra v. [Inion of India2 laid down the method of determination of the market value and further observed that: "10. Market Value: Firsl question that emerges is what would be the reasonable market value which the acquired lands are capable offetching. Il/'hile fixing the market value of the acquired land, the Land Acquisition (fficer is required to keep in mind the following factors: (i) existing geographical situation of the land; (ii) existing use of the lond; (iii) already ovailable advantages, like proximity to Nationnl or State Highway or road and/or developed area and (iv) market value of other land silualed in the same local ity/village/area or adjacent or very near to the acquired land. ll. The standard method of determination of the market value ol anv acquirecl land is bv the valuer eval the latd on the date of valuetion oublicalton o nol f ion Under kction 4 o{ the Act acting 0s a hypothetical purchaser willing to pwchase the land in open market al lhe prevailing price on that day, from a seller willing to sell -such land at a reasonable price. Thus, the market value is determined with reference to the open market sale of comparable land in the neighbourhood, hy a v,illing I 1zo r sy z scc zoz L4 AKS,J&VRKR,J UAS No 670 201 I seller to a willing buyer, on or before the date of preliminary, rufirtcafion, as that would give a fair indicution of the market value."

28. It is pertinent to note that the PW.l, Dumala Verr:anna, one of the claimants, categorically deposed that the acquired ku ds are centrally situated at Sirikonda, which is a Mandal headquarter and strategically located between Vemulawada and other important towns. He further stated that the village is endowed with all amenities on pal vith a developed town, and that the lands, being abutting both the main r(,: d and the village road possess high potentiality for conversion into rouse-sites. The testimony of PW.l is consistent with the pleadings anl the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the claimants.

29. In order to substantiate their claim, the claimants r,: ied upon Exs.Al Nd A2. PW.2, the vendor under Ex.A[, has deposed hat he sold 288 square yards in Sy.No.375 for a consideration of Rs.23,llr0/-, working out to about Rs.80/- per square yard. PW.3, the attestor to E< A2, has deposed that an extent of 66.66 square yards in Sy.No.387 was sc d by the owners therein at Rs.75l- per square yard.

30. considering the contention advanced on behalf of r he appellant that Exs.Al and 42 pertain only to small house-site plots an,l therefore cannot form the basis for determining the value of larger tracts, th s court is of the t5 AKS,J& ''RKR.J L.A.A.S.No 670 of 201 I opinion that the argument is not sustainable. It is well settled that though transactions relating to small extents may not, by themselves, be safe exemplars for valuing extensive agricultural lands, such transactions cannot be wholly discarded, especially when the acquisition is for residential purposes. When the very object of acquisition is to provide house-sites, sale deeds of small house plots in the same village and of proximate period fumish valuable guidance for assessing the potentiality and the prevailing market trend.

31. On the other hand, the LAO placed relianoe upon Ex.Bl, which reflected a transaction in Sy.No.l49 wherein 3Vz actes of'wet land was sold for Rs.64,875/- in the year 1997. The LAO, however, chose to discard the said transaction on the ground that the acquired lands were dry in nature. This Court finds such reasoning to be unsustainable. When the acquired lands are admittedly being converted into house-sites, the fertility or availability of irrigation facility ceases to be relevant. On the contrary, as observed by the Reference Court, dry lands with firm sub-soil are often more advantageous tbr buitding purposes, since they reduce the burden o[ construction expenditure by requiring lesser foundation costs.

32. Further, the transaction in Sy.No.l49 being of the year 1997, whereas the Section 4(t ) notification in the present case was issued in l6 AKS.J&VRKR,J L.A A.S.No 670 ol20l I October, 1999, there is every justification to account for th: normal trend of escalation in land prices during the intervening period. [t is a matter of common knowledge that land values tend to appreciate l) ogressively over time, particularly in semi-urban areas like Sirikonda whi,,h functions as a Mandal headquarters. Therefore, if in the year 1997, 'vet lands in the village were fetching Rs.64,875/- per acre, the dry landr; with potentiality for house-sites in the year 1999 would certainly commancl r higher value.

33. It is also significant to note that RW, l, who was e:i Lrnined on behalf of the State, conceded in his cross-examination that the ar;r uired lands were fit and suitable for house-sites. Such an admission by the r fficial witness of the acquiring authority itself demolishes the foundati,r r of the award, wherein the lands were valued as if they were dry agricult rral fields. When the very purpose of acquisition is for providing house-si:r s, the fertility or otherwise of the soil becomes immaterial. The acknowlerl lement of RW.l, therefore, corroborates the stand of the claimants and m;r :es it abundantly clear that the LAO erred in disregarding the true potentiz t of the acquired lands.

34. A perusal of the award of the Reference Court reveals that the Reference Court has consciously avoided adopting ei her the inflated values indicated in Exs.Al and 42 or the meagre rare rel ected in Ex. Bl. l7 AKS.J&YRK&J L-A.A.S.No 670 oJ 201 I Thus, the determination of Rs.20l- per sq. yard by the Reference Court represents ajust and fair assessment of the market value.

35. This Court further finds that the Reference Court has correctly appreciated the relevant factors while determining the market value. It has not confined its consideration merely to the present agricultural use of the lands, but has rightly taken into account their future potential, particularly in light of the fact that the acquisition itself was for the purpose of providing house-sites. The evidence of PW.l, corrohrated by PWs.2 and 3, estabtishes that even at the relevant time, the lands were centrally located within Sirikonda Mandal headquarters, abutting the main road, and were eminently suitable for conversion into house-sites. Moreover, the acquired lands are situated within a developing Mandal headquarters, and enjoying proximity to important towns, thereby enhancing their value. The reliance placed upon proximate sale deeds, in conjunction with other material evidence, has enabled the Reference Court to arrive at a conclusion which is both reasoned and just. IX. CONCLUSION:

36. tn light of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the considered view that the Reference Court has acted on sound principles, appreciated the evidence correctly, and determined a fair market value of Rs.20l- per IE AKS,J&YRKRJ l. 1 .,t -\ Na 67O of 201 I sq. yard. The enhancement aw. arded carmot be char:rr terized either as excessive or arbitrary.

37. Hence, for the reasons discussed hereinabove, tlt s Court is of the considered view that the findings of the Reference Cc:rt are based on proper appreciation of both oral and documentary evic ence, and are in consonance with the settled legal principles govemin6, determination of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act. The Re I :rence Court has maintained a fair balance between the exemplar sale de,r ts relied upon by the claimants and the material relied upon by the LAO, Lnd has fixed the market value in a just and reasonable manner. The enha,, ement granted is neither excessive nor unsupported by the record. Theref:.e, the impugned order of the Reference court warr-ants no interfererrce by r ris court and the appellant failed to establish any of the grounds urged in r he memorandum of appeal and thereby the appeal is devoid of merirs rnd liable to be dismissed. X. RESULT:

38. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we find no merit in this appeal. The judgment of the Reference Court does not ca I fbr interference. In result, the appeal stands dismissed. 'rhe claimants shall be cntitled to all statutory benefits under the Act, including soratium, acr<r -ional varue and t9 AKS.J&I/WRJ L.A.A.S.No.670 of 2OI I interest. [n the circumstances, there shatt be no order as to costs As a sequel, misce[laneous applications pending if any in the appeat, shall stand closed. SD/. N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO DEPUTYREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFfICER To,

1. The I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad 2. Two CCs to the GP FOR APPEALS, High Court for the State of Telangana at 3. One CC to SRI V MANOHAR RAO, Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CD Copies Hyderabad (OUT) ADK/PSL s HIGH COURT DATED:26l0gl2025 JUDGMENT+DECREE, LAAS.No.67O ot 2011 c,l i\' t { \t \r'r$'[rll ,: ;a- I (,) ,J DISMISSING THE LAAS WITHOUT COSTS &t o\ ,-A [ 34s0 J IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENW SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUI,IAR SHAVILI rHE HoNouRABLE sRr rr"r,tl?o^,, RAMAKRT'HNA REDD' LANO ACQUISITION FIRST APPEAL NO : 670 oF 2011 Between: The Land Acquisition officer, (Revenue Divisional Officer) Nizamabad. AND ...AppellanUReferring Officer Sri. Dumala Venkanna. S/o Chinna Gangaram, R/o. Sirikonda (V and M) of Nizamabad District Sri Golla Savanna. S/o. Voddenna, R/o. Sirikonda (V and M) of Nizamabad District. Sri Golla Ramutu, S/o. Voddenna, R/o. Sirikonda ( V and M) of Nizamabad District 2 J ...Respondents/Claimants Appeal under section 54 of L.A. Act 1g94 against the order and decree dated 22'06-2010 made rn o,p No. 1 1 47 of 2oo2 on tnelte oi the court of the r nooitonar District J udge, Nizamabad. .. Ihis appeat coming on for hearing and upon perusing the grouflds of appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower court and tne mat6riat plpers in tne'6ise 3."9. ypg! hearing the arguments of Gp FOR APPEALS for ttre Ab#ilant anO oiSnr V MANOHAR RAO, Advocate for the Respondents. This Court doth Order and Decree as follows: 1 . That the LAAS be and hereby is dismissed; 2. That the claimants shall be entitled to all statutory ber:fits under the Act, including solatium, additional value and interest, 3. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SO/. N.CHA[,.II)RA SEKHAR RAO DE PUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \_:= { iECTION OFFICER To,

1. The I Additional District Judge, Nizamabad 2. Two CD Copies ADK/PSL iO HIGH COURT DATED:2610912025 DECREE LAAS.No.670 of 2011 DISMISSING THE LAAS WITHOUT COSTS ,["u I