Compensation for land acquired for railway purposes must reflect true market value without unjust deductions, emphasizing the principle that such acquisitions do not warrant reductions typically applicable to residential site developments.

JUDGMENT:

Tirumala Devi Eada, J.

This appeal, under Section 54 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894, (for short ‘the Act’) is preferred by the appellants – claimants, aggrieved by the order and decree dated 02.05.2003 passed in O.P.No.71 of 1999 by the learned Additional District Judge at Mahabubnagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Reference Court’).

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

3. The facts of the case in brief are that the land to an extent of Ac.02-28 guntas was acquired by the Government for formation of Metro gauge to Broad gauge railway line at Balanagar. Draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 12.01.1996, while the possession was taken on 21.03.1994. After due enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer has fixed the market value @ Rs.30,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said award, the claimants have made an application under Section 18 of the Act, which was referred to the Additional District Judge at Mahabubnagar.

4. The case of the claimants is that the acquired land is very near to the National Highway and that just behind the acquired land there are commercial complexes, hotels and shops, also a railway station and an MRO Office and that the acquired land is of commercial value.

5. The reference Court has framed the following points for consideration:

“1. What is the market value of the acquired land by the date of acquisition?

2. Whether the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation?”

6. Before the reference Court, the claimants got examined PWs 1 to 3 and got marked Exs.A1 to A6. On behalf of the respondent, RW1 was examined and Ex.B1 was marked.

7. Based on the evidence on record, the reference Court has enhanced the compensation to Rs.50,000/- but made a deduction of Rs.15,000/- and thus, arrived at a market value of Rs.35,000/- per acre, apart from statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the said award, the claimants have preferred the present appeal.

8. Heard the submissions of Sri A.Kranthikumar Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants and learned Government Pleader for the respondent.

9. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the reference Court has erroneously arrived at the principle of making deductions for development in an acquisition made for the purpose of broad gauge railway line. He further argued that the said deductions would be made when it is acquired for the purpose of house sites but not for the purpose of railway line. He further argued that the reference Court failed to consider the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 and also the documents filed under Exs.A1 to A6. He further argued that PW2 is the purchaser of the land under Ex.A1 and his evidence was also not considered by the reference Court and also that the reference Court failed to consider the judgment of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubnagar in OP No.249 of 1984, wherein the reference Court has awarded Rs.70/- per square yard and the Hon’ble High Court reduced to Rs.45/- per square yard, when the land was acquired for the purpose of house sites, therefore, they claimed to enhance the compensation to Rs.50/- per square yard.

10. The learned Government Pleader has submitted that the reference Court has considered all the evidence on record and has arrived at just compensation and has therefore, prayed to uphold the same.

11. Based on the above rival contentions, this Court frames the following points for determination:

1. Whether the claimants are entitled for enhancement of compen