The market value of acquired land is determined using the comparable sales method, considering genuineness, proximity, and similarity; where land is suitable for residential development, a higher valuation than agricultural rates is justified even if some comparable sales are of smaller plots.

JUDGMENT:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Hari Haranadha Sarma)

Introductory

:-

[i] This appeal is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short ‘the Act’ ] and directed against the orders dated 28.02.2013 passed in LAOP No.27 of 2005 by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Nuzvid.

[ii] The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.) and Land Acquisition Officer, Vijayawada, who made reference under Section 18 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 filed the present appeal, questioning the compensation fixed as excessive.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties will be referred to as the claimants and referring officer.

Facto matrix:-

3.

[i] For the construction of Booster Station by the Gas Authority of India Ltd., Vijayawada, land measuring Ac.23.36 cents in G. Konduru village was acquired under award No.1/2003, dated 02.08.2003, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for certain lands and Rs.1,25,000/- per acre for certain other lands, apart from other incidental benefits.

[ii] Considering the application/protest of the claimant/ one Mukkamala Koteswararao as to inadequacy of compensation and the price fixed and also the objection as to non-consideration of crop etc., present in the lands, reference was made in terms of section 18 of the land Acquisition Act.

[iii] Since the claimant/one Mukkamala Koteswararao died, his legal representatives were added as claimants 2 to 5.

Case of the claimant :-

4.

[i] The land in an extent of 0.57 cents of land in R.s.No.247/2B of G.Konduru village of G.Konduru Mandal, Krishna District, belonging to the claimant/Mukkamala Koteswararao was acquired.

[ii] Land Acquisition Officer failed to consider the circumstances and mechanically fixed the compensation.

[iii] The land fetched @₹10,00,000/- to Rs.16,00,000/- per acre, when it is sold as residential plots, in surrounding areas.

[iv] Minimum value of the land cost is ₹10,00,000/- per acre, but it is ignored by the Land Acquisition Officer.

[v] As promised employment was not provided to the claimant.

[vi] Compensation fixed for the crop is also very low.

[vii] The claimant is entitled for compensation for the land @Rs.5,00,000/- per acre as minimum and more than what is awarded for standing crop, trees and plants.

[viii] The extent of land acquired is Ac.0.57 cents whereas the compensation is paid for Ac.0.52cents and did not pay the compensation for the remaining Ac.0.05 cents of land.

[ix] Here itself this Court finds it proper to note that the learned referral Court specifically say anything with regard to the extent as to whether it is 57 cents or 52 cents but no appeal is filed by the claimant.

Case of the Land Acquisition Officer:-

5.

[i] The amount claimed by the claimant is exaggerated.

[ii] The sale transactions in the village for the relevant period were rightly considered, covering the years 1999 to 2002.

[iii] Registration statistics for (3) years preceding the last date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, was considered.

[iv] Two sales in the year 1999, 34 sales in the year 2000, 27 sales in the year 2001, 16 sales in the year 2002, were considered and the market value is fixed @Rs.1,25,000/- per acre in respect of the lands nearer to the road and Rs.1,00,000/- per acre in respect of the lands far away from the road. The valuation is justified.

[v] As per the basic register maintained by the Sub-Registrar, the value of the land is around Rs.40,000/- per acre.