Back
2025 Supreme(AP) 851
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Ninala Jayasurya, Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, JJ.
Kancham chowdi reddy, s/o. late Nagireddy and ors. - Appellants
Versus
Special Deputy Collector, L.A. - Respondent
Land Acquisition Appeal Suit No: 326 and 329 of 2008, Land Acquisition First Appeal No : 326 of 2008
Decided On : 26-06-2025
For the Appellant : Sri K Viswanatha Reddy
For the Respondent: GP
The established legal principle is that the compensation for land acquisition must be determined using market value comparisons, particularly for smaller plots influencing larger land valuations.
Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4(1), 6, and 17(4) - Appeal against the determination of compensation for acquired land - The value of the acquired land was fixed at Rs.55,000/- per acre leading to appellants' appeal seeking higher compensation based on market value - Court found that the reference court disregarded crucial documentary evidence presented by claimants and failed to assign valid reasons for its decisions. (Paras 8, 20, 21)
(B) Land valuation - The test for proper assessment of market value is based on comparable sales, particularly emphasizing the evidentiary weight of smaller plot sales concerning larger land tracts. (Paras 10, 12, 18)
Facts of the case:
Appellants' lands were adjacent to a village, suitable for housing, and acquired for a balancing reservoir. Appellants sought higher compensation than initially awarded.
Findings of Court:
The court established the compensation at Rs.1,10,000/- per acre, acknowledging significant errors in the reference court's assessment.
Issues: Whether the value should rely on smaller plots for large tracts and if the reference court's findings were justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed the necessity of using applicable market comparisons in land valuation, stressing the need for demonstrable evidence when challenging valuation assessments.
Result: Appeals allowed with compensation fixed at Rs.1,10,000/- per acre.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of land acquisition appeals and initial requisition facts. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claimants argue for higher compensation based on land value. (Para 7 , 15) |
| 3. supreme court principles on land valuation discussed. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 4. court examines document credibility and provides analysis. (Para 14 , 16 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. final ruling on compensation awarded to claimants. (Para 22) |
JUDGMENT :
Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J.
A common order was delivered in LAOP No.52 of 1999 and in LAOP No.66 of 1999 along with other LAOPs. The present land acquisition appeals i.e., LAAS No.326 and 329 of 2008 are filed against LAOP Nos. 52 of 1999 and 66 of 1999 respectively on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Penukonda, as such these appeals are disposed vide common order.
2. Requisition department through letter No.339/M/dt. 17.02.1990 has requested the Land Acquisition Department to extent of Acres 1,170 of Peddakotla Village of acquire an Tadimarri Mandal for construction of reservoir. As facts have not correctly or properly placed on record basing on the narration of facts a draft notification under Section 4 (1) of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 (for short “Act”) and a draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 13.03.1995 in the gazette was approved on 04.03.1995 invoking urgency clause under Section 17 (4) by dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5A of the Act for acquisition, a piece of land in an extent of Ac.23-29 cents for the purpose of balancing reservoir of Chitravathi and the said acquisition has finally come to an end on hectic efforts made by the Government and paid an amount of Rs.60,25,207/- (in words Sixty lakh Twenty Five thousand Two Hundred and Seven rupees) for total extent of Ac.23-29 cents of land vide award number 13/1996.
3. Different survey numbers (26 in number) of lands were acquired and the land for an extent of Ac.3.44 1/2 cents in Sy.No.509 was acquired of the appellant in LAAS No.326 of 2008 and land in an extent of Ac.7-73 1/2 cents in Sy.No:511/1 of the appellant in LASS No. 329 of 2008 was acquired for the aforesaid purpose.
4. The Land Acquisition Officer has categorized the acquired land into 5 (five) different groups for the payment of compensation acre wise and the same is shown in the below table:
| Group-1 | Group-2 | Group-3 | Group-4 | Group-5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rs. 40,000/- | Rs. 40,000/- | Rs. 25,000/- | Rs. 55,000/- | No value fixed |
5. The land of the appellants in Sy.Nos. 509 and 511/1 fall under group 4 (four) and the land value fixed at the rate of Rs.55,000/- per acre. Nothing was stated by the reference Court, for arriving of the land value in 5 different categories by the LAO.
6. Being aggrieved by the fixation of land value at the rate of Rs.55,000/- by the LAO, the appellants herein have received the amount on protest and pressed to refer the award to the reference Court under Section 18 of the Act. Accordingly the award was referred to the reference Court, it was registered as LAOP Nos. 52 and 66 of the appellants herein along with some other LAOPs of other claimants.
7. As many as 21 claimants were examined and the claimants have unequivocally stated that the acquired lands is adjoining to the village and is suitable for house sites and hayrick yards and holds good value, and the claimants further stated that there was great demand for the house sites even before the acquisition took place hence urged the reference court to fix the land value at the rate Rs.4,000/- per cent which they considered is- just and appropriate. In fact the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) acknowledged in the award that the land falls under category 4, suitable for house sites and is adjacent to the village. However, despite this finding, the reference court determined the value to be Rs.55,000/- per acre.
8. The reference Court disregarded the documents filed by the claimants simply observing that the documents does not reflect the true market value while doing so has failed to provide any valid reasons for disregarding t
