One CC to SRl v. MANOHAR RAO

Petition under Section 1 5'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay a_ll further proceedings in oP No. 73105 on the file of the senior civil Judge, Karimnagar dt. 15-02-07 including execution proceedings, pending disposal of ihe above appeal Counsel for the Appellant: GP FOR APPEALS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : SRI V. MANOHAR RAO Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: None appeared The Court delivered the following Judgment : HOIT'BLE SRI WSTICE ABHINAND KT,'MAR SHAVILI AITD HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRT'trIAL,A DEVI EADA L.A.A.S.No.715 of 2fi)7 .TI,DGMEIYT: (per Hon'ble Smt. Justice Tirurnala Deui F.ada) This appeal, under Section 54 of the [,and Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short 'the ActJ is preferred by the Special Deputy Collector, L.A. Unit, LMD Colony, Karimnagar, agg;rieved by the order and decree dated 13.O2.2OO7 passed in O.P.No.73 of 20O5 by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Karimnagar (hereirrafter referred to as 'the reference CourtJ-

2. For convenience and clarity, the parLies herein are referred to as they were arrayed before the reference Court.

3. The facts of t.Ile case in brief are that based on the requisition made by the Executive Engineer, ID., CCD No.XI, LMD, the land to an extent of Ac.O2-08 guntas of lan<l, situated at Maddikunta and Mamidialpally villages of Manakondur Revenue Mandal of Karimnagar District was acquired, for excavation of the sub-distributory No.S, L of DEM-6 SRSP. Draft notif-rcation under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in the Gazette on 17.09.1986 and the possession of the lands was taken in advance on

20.02.1983. After due enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer has 2 AKS,J & ETDJ LAAs No.715 2007 awarded Rs.6,OOO/- per acre. Aggrieved by ttre said award, the claimants have filed a petition for reference and the sarne was referred under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Karimnagar. 4- The case of the claimants is that their villages have all civic amenities like high school, electricity, Telecommunications, State Bank of Hyderabad branch, veterinaqi hospital and transport faciliLies single window society etc., and that their villages are situated at a distance of 15 KM from Karimnagar headquarters and that their lands are abutting the PWD road leading from Karimnagar to Jammikunta.

5. The reference Court has framed the following issue for consideration: "Whether the claimants are entitled for enhalcement of compensation, if so, at what rate?

6. Before the reference Court, PWs 1 to 3 were examined and Exs.Al to A5 were marked. On behalf of the respondent, RWl was examined and Ex.Bl was marked.

7. Based on the evidence on record, the reference Court has enhalced the compensation to Rs.34,00O/- per acre, in addition to 3 AKs,J & EID,J IAAS No.715 2007 r all the statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the Special Deputy Collector has preferred the present appeal.

8. Heard the submissions of the learned Government Pleader for the appellant and Sri V.Manohar Rao, learned counsel for the respondents.

9. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that the reference Court has erred in enhancing the compensation, which is not tenable in the eye of law and that the witrresses examined on behalf of the claimants were interested witnesses, and that it cannot be relied upon. He further contended that Exs.Al to A5 do not reflect the correct value and the same cannot be taken into consideration while hxing the market value and that the reference Court erred in awarding additional market value and interest from the date of possession. He therefore, prayed to set aside the order and decree of the reference Court by allowing this appeal.

10. The learned respondents counsel has submitted that ttre reference Court has taken all the factors into consideration while enhancing the compensation and that it does not need any interference, therefore, prayed to uphold the order and decree passed by the reference Court 4 AKSJ & ETDJ I-AAS No-715_2007

11. Based on the above rival contentions, t].is Court frames the following points for determinaLion: 1 2 Whether the claimants are not entifled for enhancement of compensation? Whether the order and decree of the reference Court need any interference?

3. To what relief.)

12. PTOINT NO.l: a) PW1 is the claimant No.2, he relied upon Exs.Al to A3 which are the sale deeds dated 13.08.1985. In support of his case, he also got examined PW2 who is the attestor of these documents. b) A perusal of Exs.Al to A3 reveals that ttrey pertain to the lands in the adjacent village. A perusal of the land Acquisition Officer's award reveals that there are various sale transactions, under which smaller extent of lands were sold under registered sale deeds but they were not considered by the Land Acquisition Officer. The evidence of witnesses also reveals ttre said fact. c) The sale deeds under Exs.Al to A3, though they pertain to the adjacent village, they reveal one fact that the land sold was in small extents. The lands that were sold under Exs.Al to A3 fetc\ed a price of Rs.SO,OOO/- per acre under Ex.Al, Rs.49,4541' \ per acre under Ex.A2 and Rs.50,O0O/- per acre under Ex.A3. The 5 AKs,J & ETDJ LAAS No.715 2007 rI value fixed by the Land Acquisition Oflicer appears to be very low when compared to these sale deeds. No reason has been assigned by the I-and Acquisition Officer for not considering the sa'le transactions of small areas which are reflected in the sales statistics referred by him in the award. The evirlence of PW1 discloses that there are rice mills, oil mills, saw mills and other educational institutions situated nearby the acquired lands. d) The claimants have also relied upon Exs.A4 and A5 which are the copies of the order and decree passed by the reference Court i.e. Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar in O.P.No.62 of 2OO2. The said order in O.P.No.62 of 2OO2 dated 20.04.2O06 was conlrrmed by this Court in LAAS No.24 of 2OO7 daLed 06.12.2014. I I e) A perusal of the said judgment reveals that the acquisition was for the same purpose i.e. LA unit S.R.S.P LMD colony, Karimnagar for the purpose of excavation of sub-distributory No.5 L of DEM-6, SRSP. The possession of the land in said case was taken on O8.O7.1983, while the possession was taken on 2O.O2.19a3 in the present case. Since the land that was acquired is proved to be similar to that of land acquired ir OP No.62 of 2OO2, it is opined that a similar value has to be hx,:d in the land that is acquired in the present case and therefore, thr: Tribunal has 6 A(s,I & ETDJ IAAS No.715 2007 (- rightly enhanced the compensaliron to Rs.34,OOO/- per acre. point No. 1 is answered accordingly.

13. PTOINT NO.2: In view of the reasoned hnding arrived at point No.1, t-his Court holds that the order and decree of the reference Court do not need any interference.

14. POU|T IYO.3: In the result, the appeal is dismissed upholding the order and decree dated, 13.02.2007 passed in O.p.No.73 of 2005 by the learned Senior Civit Judge at Karimnagar. No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. /ffRUE COPY// SD/. K. SRINIVASA RAO OINT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar ( with records) 2. Two CCS to GP FOR APPEALS, High Court for the State of Telangna at Hyderabad

3. One CC to SRl. V. MANOHAR RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies kul/gh o ir! C ETAi o O $ t\6Nt () .:A t( E? D ,lr HIGH COURT DATED:2110312025 + DECREE JUOGMENT LAAS.No.715 ol 2OO7 DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUI'COSTS d- h"I THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY ,THE TWENry FIRST DAYOF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABH{NAND KUMAR SHAVILI And THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA L.A.A.S. NO: 715 OF 2007 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, LA Unit, LMD Colony Karimnagar Dist. ...APPELLANT/ Respondent AND

1. Kommidi Linga Reddy, S/o Venkat Reddy Agril. R/o Pachunoor Village of Manakondur Mandal Karimnagar Dist.

2. Chinthala Narayana Reddy, S/o Buchi Raji Reddy Agril. R/o Mamidapalli Village of Veenavanka mandal Karimnagar Dist.

3. Mada Adi Reddy, S/o Ram Reddy Agril. R/o Mamidapalli Village of Veenavanka mandal Karimnagar Dist.

4. Muddasani Ratna Reddy, S/o Aga Reddy, Occ: Agril R/o Utoor Village of Manakondur Mandal. Appeal Under Section 54 of L.A.Act of 1894 against the order and decree dated 15-02-2007 passed in O.P.No. 73 of 2O05 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar ...RESPONDENTS/ Claimants The appeal coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of grounds filed in the Appeal, the Judgment and Decree of the Lower Court and the record in the case and upon hearing the arguments of GP for Appeals on behalf of the Appellant and none appeared for Respondents. This Court doth order and decree as follows: 1.That the appeal be and hereby is dismissed and 2. That there shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. SD/. K. SRINIVASA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR To 1 . The Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar 2. Two C.D.Copies I "^( S€-zX ..^L tt*A:- % HIGH COURT DATED:Z110312025 DECREE LAAS.No.715 ol 2O07 DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS e{