SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- Y.K. Sabharwal and K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 2079 of 2002. (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 13596 of 2001) D/d. 14.3.2002.

Mandal Revenue Officer, Andhra Pradesh - Appellant

Versus

Yedlapally Anjeneyulu - Respondent

Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 23 - Market value - Determination - Held that, where land is also part of the same survey number but the survey number comprises land to the extent of nearly 2000 acres and for the entire land basis for working out market value cannot be same - Appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment is modified by fixing market value of Rs. 1 lakh per acre.

[Paras 5 and 6]

ORDER

Y.K. Sabharwal, J. - Delay condoned.

2. Leave granted.

3. The claimant is the respondent in this appeal. The land of the respondent situate on the outskirts of Bhadrachalam Town in Khammam District was acquired in terms of Notification dated 19-6-1985 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for construction of house sites for weaker sections of the society. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was published on 27-1-1986. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs 5500 per acre in award dated 7-3-1986. The Reference Court by judgment and order dated 27-9-1989 enhanced the compensation to Rs 11,000 per acre. The respondent still aggrieved preferred an appeal before the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh which was disposed of by impugned judgment whereby the market value of the land was determined @ Rs 25 per square yard i.e. Rs 1,21,000 per acre approximately. The judgment of the High Court is under challenge in this appeal, filed by the Mandal Revenue Officer (Land Acquisition Officer, Bhadrachalam Town).

4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the High Court while determining the market value @ Rs 25 per square yard relied upon only on the judgment in respect of the land in the same survey in respect of the land that was acquired in the year 1977 and the compensation was fixed in terms of the said judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court at Rs 15 per square yard. By that judgment, the High Court reduced the amount from Rs 25 per square yard which had been fixed in appeal by the Additional District Judge as a Reference Court. The learned Single Judge of the High Court had affirmed the order of the Reference Court which was set aside in letters patent appeal in the manner aforestated by the Division Bench fixing market value at Rs 15 per square yard. Taking the said basis for determining the market value of the land in question and considering a gap of about eight years between the two notifications and keeping in view that during the intervening period the enhancement would have been roughly about 10% per annum, the market value that was worked out was Rs 27 per square yard which was rounded off to Rs 25 per square yard by the High Court in the judgment under appeal.

5. We have been taken through the judgment of the Reference Court which sets out certain peculiar features in respect of the aforesaid land acquired in the year 1977. Learned counsel for the appellant rightly contends that though the said land is also part of the same survey number but the survey number comprises land to the extent of nearly 2000 acres and for the entire land basis for working out market value cannot be same. It appears that the earlier acquired land was in the centre of Bhadrachalam Town whereas the land in question is situated on the outskirts of the said town. Unlike the said land, even after lapse of three years, buildings had not sprung up on the agricultural land situated on the northern and western side of the land acquired, as noticed by the Reference Court.

6. It is, however, noticed that Bhadrachalam is an important pilgrimage town of Andhra Pradesh. There are several Government offices in the said town. The land itself was acquired for providing house sites for the weaker sections of the society. The instance taken into consideration may have its peculiar and special features but it is difficult to accept the contention that it was not at all relevant. On that basis alone, market value of entire land in the survey cannot be determined. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent has, however, taken us also through the sale instances incorporated in the report of the Advocate Commissioner which had been filed in the Reference Court.

7. Having examined the material on record, in our view, it would be just and expedient to determine the market value at Rs 1 lakh per acre instead of about Rs 1,21,000 per acre that was fixed by the High Court.

8. In view of the above, the appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment is modified as above fixing market value of Rs 1 lakh per acre. The parties shall bear their own costs.

Appeal partly allowed.