IMPORTANT POINT
Acquisition of land – Auction exemplars can only be used when no other comparable sale instances are available – As a rule of thumb, sale instances which take place after initiation of acquisition are not reliable sources to compute land acquisition compensation.

JUDGMENT :

(Surya Kant, J.)

Delay condoned. Leave granted.

2. The dispute which falls for consideration in these civil appeals pertains to the assessment of market value of the acquired land situated in Narsingi and Poppalguda villages, Rajendranagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District for the purpose of awarding compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1894 Act). The High Court for the State of Telangana (High Court), vide the impugned judgements, has enhanced the rate of compensation from the range of INR 9,45,000 and 28,00,000 per acre to INR 1,35,00,000 per acre. The instant cases are cross-appeals preferred by:

i. the landowners;

ii. the State of Telangana; and

iii. the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA).

3. While the landowners are seeking further enhancement, the State and the HMDA are aggrieved by the enhancement granted by the High Court.

A. FACTS

4. Although these appeals emanate from a common issue, the disputes flow from three distinct acquisitions made for the common purpose of construction of Outer Ring Road (ORR) in and around Hyderabad, specifically in the Narsingi area. The details of the acquisitions are briefly explained hereinafter.

4.1. Three acquisitions under the 1894 Act were initiated by the State of Telangana for adjoining parcels of land.

4.1.1. Notification dated 13.12.2005 was issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act for acquisition of a total of 31 acres, 33 guntas of land in Narsingi village, followed by declaration under Section 6 issued on 29.07.2006 for a total land of 23 acres, 33 guntas. (First Acquisition)

4.1.2. Notification dated 13.12.2005 was issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act for acquisition of 48 acres, 37 guntas of land in Poppalguda village. Subsequently, declaration under Section 6 was issued on 14.08.2006 for the land measuring 44 acres, 4 guntas. (Second Acquisition)

4.1.3. Notification dated 04.04.2006 was issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act for acquiring 30 acres of land in Narsingi and Poppalguda village. The State also invoked its powers under Section 17 (1) & (2) read with Section 17 (4) of the 1894 Act for urgent acquisition, and soon thereafter, published the declaration under Section 6 on 06.04.2006. (Third Acquisition).

4.2. Each acquisition led to separate proceedings for determining the compensation payable to the expropriated landowners.

4.2.1. In the First Acquisition, the Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition (LAC) passed an Award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act on 03.10.2007, setting the compensation at INR 7,56,000 per acre. However, after reference was made under Section 18, the XIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District (Reference Court), vide order dated 27.12.2018, enhanced the rate of compensation to INR 28,00,000 per acre.

4.2.2. In the Second Acquisition, the LAC passed an Award dated 03.10.2007, granting compensation at the rate of INR 5,45,000 per acre, which was enhanced by the Reference Court, vide order dated 17.12.2018, to INR 18,75,000 per acre.

4.2.3. In the Third Acquisition, the LAC, vide Award dated 25.05.2006, granted compensation at the rate of INR 7,56,000 per acre, which was enhanced by the Reference Court, vide order dated 17.12.2018, to INR 9,45,000 per acre.

4.3. During the pendency of the reference proceedings, the landowners, under protest, accepted payment of the compensation awarded by the LAC.

4.4. All three awards of the Reference Court were then the subject matter of appeals and cross-objections before the High Court.

4.5. The High Court decided the appeals and cross objections in the First and Third Acquisitions through a common judgement dated 28.09.2022 (Lead Impugned Judgement), while the appeal and cross appeal in the Second Acquisition were decided by two separate judgements dated 28.03.2023, which were passed in terms of the Lead Impugned Judgement. As such, the High Court granted unifor