HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K. JAISWAL L.A.A.S.No. 127 of 2014 and CROSS APPEAL (SR).No. 3585 of 2014 DATE: 08.10.2014 L.A.A.S.No. 127 of 2014:-
Between:-
The Deputy Collector (L.A) .. Appellant-
Referring Officer and Konda Reddy Venkatarami Reddy and 36 others .. Respondents- claimants Cross Appeal(sr).No.3585 of 2014:- Between:-
Kundla Eswara Reddy and 27 others .. Cross Objectors-
Claimants and The Special Deputy Collector and 10 others .. Respondents JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice G. Chandraiah) The Land Acquisition Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 24.01.2009 passed in L.A.O.P.No. 325 of 2002 on the file of I Additional District Judge, Kadapa whereby the Original Petition filed by the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) on reference sought by the claimants under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity “the Act”) for determination of the market value of the lands and fruit bearing trees belonging to the claimants which were acquired for the purpose of Somasila Project, was disposed of.
The brief admitted facts of the case are that certain lands, structures and fruit-bearing trees belonging to the claimants situated in Penna Peruru village, Rajampet Mandal, Kadapa District being submersible under the waters of Somasila Project were acquired by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. The Land Acquisition Officer divided the entire village into 5 reaches for the sake of convenience to facilitate the work. Draft Notification was published under Section 4(1) of the Act for the lands in Reach No.IV on 17.05.1995 and for the lands in Reach Nos.2, 3 and 5 on 18.06.1995. The urgency provisions under Section 17(4) of the Act were invoked dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5(A) of the Act. Subsequently, the Land Acquisition Officer passed Award Nos. 9/97-98 to 12/97-98 dated 05.12.1997 for the lands in Reach Nos. 2 to 5 respectively. The Land Acquisition Officer categorized the lands of the village and fixed the market value as under:
Category I(a):-
Registered wet lands under tank -- Nil Category I(b):-
Registered irrigable dry lands under tanks and Doruvu wells -- Nil Category II(a):-
Dry lands irrigable under Private wells filter points sunk in patta lands Rs.20,000/- per acre Category II(b):-
Dry Lands irrigable under private wells filter points sunk in poramboke lands pillar beds Rs.10,000/- per acre Category III:-
Purely Rain-fed lands under cultivation without any irrigation facility Rs.10,000/- per acre Category IV:-
Dry lands cultivable waste lands Rs. 5,000/- per acre Category V:-
Uncultivable waste lands Rs. 2,000/- per acre No compensation was paid for the wells, bore wells, pipe lines, etc. on the ground that higher rate was fixed for the lands falling in Category II(a) and (b). Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the claimants sought reference under Section 18 of the Act in L.A.O.P.No. 325 of 2002 by filing their claim statements clearly mentioning the structures and trees belonging to them, and the learned I Additional District Judge, Kadapa, after examining the evidence recorded in the shape of PW1, RWs.1 to 8, Exs.A1 to A2 and Exs.B1 to B33, vide order dated 24.01.2009, disposed of the petition in the following terms:
“The market value of the lands covered under the reference i.e. Category II (a) and (b) are enhanced and fixed at Rs.60,000/- per acre leaving the extent occupied by the fruit bearing trees. The market value of the orange big and small and acid lime at Rs.2,550/- per each tree, the Coconut tree at Rs.2,100/- each, Pomegranate tree at Rs.700/- each, Drumstick at Rs.500/- each, Soap nut, Guava and Tamarind tree at Rs.1,500/- each and mango tree at Rs.2,500/- each. The claimants are also entitled to 30% solatium on the market value, 12% additional market value from the date of 4(1) Notification i.e. 18.06.1995 in respect of the lands under Reach Nos.2, 3 and 5 and from 17.05.1995 for Reach No.4 till the date of award i.e. 05.12.1997 on the market value. The claimants are also entitled to interest on the market value, solatium and additional market value at the rate of 9% per annum for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum from the date of award till the date of deposit of the entire amount into the Court. The reference is disposed of accordingly.”
Being aggrieved by the order of the trial Court, the Referring Officer – Deputy Collector (L.A.) has preferred the appeal against enhancement of compensation in respect of the lands in question while some of the claimants have filed Cross Appeal (sr).No.3585 of 2014 alleging that the trial Court failed to determine the correct market value for the fruit bearing trees.
The learned Government Pleader for Appeals has submitted that the Reference Court erred in enhancing the market value of the acquired lands to Rs.60,000/- per acre against the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre without any b a s i s . The Reference Court also erred in enhancing the compensation regarding the fruit bearing trees by not taking into consideration the judgment reported in Land Acquisition Officer v. Pompana Shetty [(2005(2) ALD 86] wherein proper multiplier to be adopted is 10 and it has also failed to calculate the age of the trees without following the yielding method and without properly deducting the expenditure from the gross income so as to arise net income per acre per annum. It is also contended that the Reference Court ought to have seen that the witnesses examined on behalf of the claimants were interested and their evidence is not supported by any corroborative evidence.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the claimants submits that the Reference Court, vide order dated 24.01.2009, enhanced lesser compensation in respect of the acquired lands which is grossly inadequate than the adequate compensation awarded to the similar lands situated in adjacent villages which comes around Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. So far as fixing the market value in respect of fruit bearing trees are concerned, Reference Court failed to determine true and correct value. Therefore, he submits that the market value that was fixed by the Reference Court for the lands acquired by the Government and for the fruit bearing trees may be enhanced by considering the cross-objections filed by the claimants.
Now, the points that arise for consideration are:
1. Whether the compensation enhanced by the Reference Court in respect of the acquired lands is adequate or not?
2. Whether the compensation fixed by the Reference Court in respect of the fruit bearing trees needs to be enhanced by considering the cross-objections filed by the claimants?
The learned counsel for both the parties have submitted that the subject matter under appeal is squarely covered by the judgment dated 06.11.2013 of this Court delivered in L.A.A.S.Nos.53, 132, 175 and 219 of 2010, wherein this Court has taken appropriate view in determining the market value for both the lands and structures / fruit bearing trees, and these appeals may be disposed of in terms thereof.
We have carefully perused the material available on record particularly the covered judgment in L.A.A.S.No. 53 of 2010 and batch, by virtue of which, this Court, having elaborately discussed the facts by referring various judgments of this Court and considering the decision of the Apex Court in identical circumstances in Asst. Commissioner-cum-Land Acquisition Officer v. S.T. Pompanna Setty, enhanced the market value of the vacant land therein to Rs.30,000/- per acre and also increased the market value of various fruit bearing trees.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, and the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and following the judgment dated 06.11.2013 delivered in L.A.A.S.No. 53 of 2010 and batch, we are inclined to pass the following order:
a) The market value of the acquired lands belonging to the claimants in Category II(a) and (b) which was enhanced by the trial Court to Rs.60,000/- is hereby reduced to Rs.30,000/- per acre and the market value of the under-mentioned fruit-bearing trees belonging to the claimants is fixed as follows:
a) Big and Small and acid lime trees - Rs.4,000/- per tree
b) Coconut trees - Rs.3,000/- per tree
c) Pomegranate trees - Rs.2,000/- per tree
d) Drum Stick trees - Rs. 500/- per tree
e) Soap nut, Guava and Tamarind Trees – Rs.3,000/- per tree
f) Mango trees - Rs.3,000/- per tree
b) The claimants are hereby entitled to Additional market value at 12% per annum on the market value from the date of 4(1) Notification i.e. 18.06.1995 in respect of the lands under Reach Nos.2, 3 and 5 and from 17.05.1995 for Reach No.4 till the date of the Award i.e. 05.12.1997.
c) The claimants are hereby entitled to solatium at 30% on the market value.
d) The claimants are hereby entitled to interest at 9% per annum on the market value, Additional market value and solatium for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum from the date of award i.e. 05.12.1997 till the date of deposit of the entire amount.
In terms of the above observations, the Land Acquisition Appeal and the Cross Appeal are partly allowed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel to the allowing of the appeals in part, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
G. CHANDRAIAH, J 08.10.2014 M.S.K. JAISWAL, J bcj