SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 473

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, JJ.
The Special Deputy Collector - Petitioner
Versus
Ponaganti Muthyam Rao & Ors. - Respondents
LAAS.No.301 of 2013
Decided On : 05-09-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: GP for Appeals.
For the Respondent: P. Devender.

IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that only comparable sales in proximity should be considered for determining market value in land acquisition cases, rejecting reliance on unrelated transactions.

Headnote:

(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 54 and Section 18 – Appeal against enhancement of market value of acquired lands – Reference Court enhanced market value from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per acre based on comparable sale transactions – The court found that the Reference Court erred in relying on documents not pertaining to the subject lands for valuation – The court upheld the need for reasonable escalation in land value based on time and market conditions. (Paras 6, 10, 20, 22)

(B) Market Value Determination – The court emphasized that only similar lands in proximity should be considered for market value assessment, and reliance on unrelated sale transactions is improper. (Paras 16, 21)

Facts of the case: The appeal was filed by the Special Deputy Collector challenging the Reference Court's order enhancing the compensation for acquired lands from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.20,000/- per acre based on evidence presented by the claimants. The lands were acquired for public purposes, and the claimants sought a reference under the Act after receiving the initial compensation under protest.

Findings of Court: The court found that the Reference Court had improperly relied on sale transactions from different villages and had not justified the enhancement adequately, but upheld the final market value determined after reasonable escalation.

Issues: The main issue was whether the Reference Court was justified in enhancing the market value based on the evidence presented.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that only comparable sales in proximity should be considered for determining market value, and the Reference Court's reliance on unrelated transactions was erroneous.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, J.

Heard learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for the appellant and Sri P.Devender, learned counsel for the respondents-claimants.

2. This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short ‘the Act’) is filed by the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition Officer), Huzurabad, challenging the order and decree dated 08.11.2006 passed in O.P.No.50 of 1997 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Huzurabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Reference Court’).

3. The brief facts of the case are that on a requisition made by the Executive Engineer, Jammikunta, the lands belonging to the respondents/claimants to a total extent of Acs.34.11 guntas situated in the limits of Narsingapur and Kanaparthy Villages, H/o Veenavanka Mandal, were acquired for excavation of 12L-R IL to 12 to DBM-15 in the limits of Narsingapur and Kanaparthi of Veenavanka Mandal, Karimnagar District; that the draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in A.P. Gazettee on 07.05.1985; and that the Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting necessary award enquiry, passed Award No.15/87-88, dated 11.08.1987, fixing the market value of the acquired lands @ Rs.4,000/- per acre.

4. The respondents/claimants received the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer under protest and sought reference under Section 18 of the Act and the same was numbered as O.P.No.50 of 1997 on the file of the Reference Court.

5. Before the Reference Court, on behalf of the respondents/claimants, P.Ws.1 to 6 were examined and Exs.A-1 to A-8 were marked. On behalf of the Referring Officer, R.W-1 was examined and Exs.B-1 and B-2-Award proceedings and Award, respectively, were marked.

6. The Reference Court, on consideration of the evidence on record, by the impugned order enhanced the market value of the acquired lands to Rs.20,000/- per acre from Rs.4,000/- per acre, apart from granting other benefits under the Act to the respondents/ claimants.

7. Aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Reference Court, the present appeal is filed.

8. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for the appellant-Land Acquisition Officer contended that the Reference Court erred in relying upon Exs.A-6 and A-7, though the lands covered thereunder are no way similar to the subject acquired lands; and thus, the Reference Court erred in enhancing the market value of the acquired lands exorbitantly and therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-claimants contended that the Reference Court has duly followed the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while relying upon Exs.A-6 and A-7 for determination of market value of the acquired lands and as such, he prayed to dismiss the Appeal.

10. Based on the contentions of the learned counsel for both the parties, the issue that arises for consideration is as to whether the Reference Court was justified in enhancing the market value of the acquired lands based on Exs.A-6 and A-7.

11. To determine the market value of the acquired lands, this Court has to look into and analyze as to whether the lands covered under Exs.A-1 to A-8 are similar in nature and are situated in the vicinity of the acquired lands so as to adopt the sale price mentioned therein.

12. A perusal of Exs.A-1 and A-2-certified copies of order and decree in OP.No.74 of 1996, on the file of the Reference Court, respectively, goes to show that the lands covered thereunder are situated at Bethigal Village and the Reference Court has enhanced the market value of the acquired lands therein to Rs.35,000/- per acre. Further, Exs.A-3 and A-4 are the certified copies of order and decree in O.P.No.15 of 1997 on the file of the Reference Court, respectively, pertaining to the lands acquired in Pothireddipet Village. Under Exs.A-3 and A-4, the Reference Court has enhanced the market value of the subject acquired lands therein to Rs.50,000/- per acre.

13.

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top