HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice Tirumala Devi Eada)

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 28.07.2010 passed in L.A.O.P.No.26 of 2008 by the learned Senior Civil Judge at Siricilla.

(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 lands of the claimants were acquired at Nyalakondapalli village of Gangadhara Mandal for the purpose of new broad gauge railway line from Karimnagar to Jagtial under the limits of Gangadhara village. The draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 29.09.2006. After due enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded Rs.74,000/- per acre for dry and wet agricultural lands. Aggrieved by the said award, the claimants have filed a petition for reference and the same was referred under Section 18 of the Act to the Senior Civil Judge at Siricilla.

4. The case of the claimants is that the acquired lands are well developed agricultural lands, cultivated with well water, through electric motor pump set and SRSP canal water and they are red chelka soil in nature, rich in fertility and having high potentiality and utility. That the acquired lands are double crop dry and wet lands, commercial crops such as cotton, chilies, groundnut, green gram and vegetables were being raised and a net annual income was around Rs.50,000/- per acre from the said lands.

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

“1) whether the compensation awarded by the respondent/LAO was not just and fair in relation to acquired land and trees and if so, what is the just compensation?

2) To what relief?”

6. Before the reference Court, the claimants got examined PWs 1 to 3 and got marked Exs.P1 to P3. On behalf of the respondent, RW1 was examined and Exs.R1 and R2 were marked.

7. Based on the evidence on record, the reference Court has dismissed the O.P., upholding the award of the Land Acquisition Officer. Aggrieved by the said orders, the present appeal is filed by the appellants.

8. Heard the submissions of Sri A.Krupadhar Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.

9. Learned appellants counsel has submitted that the reference Court ought to have enhanced the compensation from Rs.74,000/- to Rs.50 Lakhs per acre, as claimed by the appellants and that the reference Court ought to have considered the evidence adduced by the appellants. He further argued that the acquired lands are situated near State Highway leading from Karimnagar to Nizamabad and are within the limits of Mandal Headquarters of Gangadhara Mandal and also the main industrial, educational and commercial complexes are at Nylakondapally village and that the acquired lands are very suitable for house sites. He further submitted that the reference Court has made an error in disbelieving the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 and discarding Exs.P1 to P3. He further argued that the reference Court ought to have considered the map filed under Ex.P3 which discloses the location of the acquired land and he argued that the amount granted by the Land Acquisition Officer is very meager and the reference Court ought not to have confirmed the award of the Land Acquisition Officer. He therefore, prayed to set aside the award passed by the reference Court and prayed to enhance the compensation, to atleast Rs.2,74,000/- per acre.

10. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 has submitted, on the other hand, that the Land Acquisition Officer has relied upon the sale statistics of Nylakondapally village and has taken the highest exemplar and has rightly awarded the compensation to the claimants and that the reference Court has appreci