Compensation for acquired land must be equitably apportioned between pattadars and possessors based on established rights and evidence of ownership.

JUDGMENT :

Tirumala Devi Eada, J.

This appeal, under Section 54 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894, (for short ‘the Act’) is filed by the appellants, aggrieved by the order and decree dated 03.03.2009 passed in O.P.No.11 of 2007 by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Adilabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’).

2. The appellants are aggrieved by the order of trial Court granting a share in the compensation to respondent Nos.2 to 10 and 12 herein. Their grievance is that they were the owners and possessors of the land that was acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad and that the compensation awarded ought to have been granted entirely to them and that the trial Court has erred in granting share in the compensation to respondent Nos.2 to 10 and 12.

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

4. The facts of the case in brief are that the matter was referred to the trial Court by the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 30 of the Act to decide the title in respect of the land acquired in Survey No.10/A extending to Ac.02-00 guntas and in survey No.12/6/126 and 12/7/128 to an extent of Ac.08-01 gunta. Before the trial Court, the claimant Nos.1 to 9 i.e. respondent Nos.1 to 9 filed their claim petition saying that they are the pattadars and possessors of survey No.10/A admeasuring Ac.02-00 guntas, situated at Pippaldhari Village, survey No.12/6 corresponding to 12/126 admeasuring Ac.15- 00 guntas out of which Ac.04-15 guntas was acquired and in survey No.12/128 admeasuring Ac.03.26 guntas situated at Pippaldhari Village, Adilabad Mandal and District and that their father never sold any land to anybody including the other claimants i.e. respondent Nos.11 to 13. Respondent No.10 has filed a claim statement stating that respondent Nos.1 to 9 are the pattadars and possessors and that he is not having any right or title over the land bearing survey No.10/A and that he has no objection if compensation is awarded to respondent Nos.1 to 9. Respondent Nos.11 and 12 have filed petitions submitting that they are the owners, pattadars and possessors of the land in survey No.12/6 at present 12/126 and 12/128 and it is also called as 12/6/126 and 12/7/128 to an extent of Ac.10-00 guntas, situated at Pippaldhari Village of Adilabad Mandal and District and that the said land was acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer. They further submitted that their father Are Babanna purchased the said land in the year 1957 from Nayeemullah Khan S/o.Abdul Rahman Khan and that through him they came into possession over the acquired land. Respondent No.13 has not filed any claim statement before the Land Acquisition Officer at the time of award enquiry.

5. Based on the averments, the trial Court has framed the following points for consideration:

“1. Whether R1 to R9 or R10 is entitled for compensation of Sy.No.10/A extending two acres?

2. Whether R1 to R9 or the legal heirs of Are Babanna are entitled for compensation for the acquired land in Sy.No.12/6/126 and 12/7/128 extending 8-01 gunta?

3. Whether R13 is the daughter of Are Babanna and whether she is entitled to 1/4^th share in the compensation amount?”

6. Before the trial Court, PWs 1 to 6 were examined and Exs.A1 to A3 were marked. Based on the evidence on record, the trial Court has passed the award granting 60% compensation to respondent Nos.11 to 13, 40% compensation to respondent Nos.1 to 9, 1/4th share out of the 60% is allotted to respondent No.13, while the claim made by respondent No.10 was dismissed. The trial Court further held that respondent No.14 has not filed any claim sta