Land Acquisition Officer, Sub-Collector vs Hindustan Commercial and Transport Co. (P) Ltd.

G. Radhakrishna Rao, J.—The appellant preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Judgment and decree dated 20-9-1982 in O.P. No. 268/81 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Vijayawada enhancing the compensation to Rs. 1,75,000/- per acre for Act 4.55 of land in R.S. No. 65/A1 A as against the rate of Rs. 30,000/- per acre fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer.

The Land Acquisition Officer, after considering the potentialities of the land duly taking into account the importance of that area and the sale-statistics furnished by the concerned authorities, valued the land under acquisition i.e., Ac.4.55 cents at Rs. 30,000/- per acre. Section 4(1) notification was published in the official gazette on 29-10-1975. Award was passed on 5-3-1981. On reference u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the learned Subordinate Judge took into consideration Exs. A-1 to A-16, B-1, B-2 and other oral evidence adduced on both sides and awarded Rs. 1,75,000/- per acre. It must be noticed here, that the claimant sought enhancement of compensation to Rs. 1,75,000/-per acre and the same was accorded by the lower Court in toto.

Learned counsel for the respondent claimant mainly contended that the learned Judge having carried away by the importance of the area, failed to take note of the legal effect of the document that was filed in support of the claim. It is true that post-notification sales will be of some help to the court to consider the increase of the rates in that particular area, but they cannot by themselves, be sole factors to be taken into consideration for fixing the value as available as on the date of notification. The crucial date for considering the market value that has been fixed by taking into account the comparable transactions is the date of Section 4(1) notification.

It is well settled that where sale-statistics have been considered by the Land Acquisition Officer and where those documents have not been marked after reference in the civil court, those documents cannot be taken into consideration and they have no evidentiary value. This view has been affirmed in Land Acquisition Officer, Vijayawada Thermal Station v. Nutalapati Venkata Rao 1990 (3) ALT 305 :1991 (1) APLJ 99 It is only the documents that were marked in the civil court, can be taken into consideration and none else.

The only document out of the transactions that is available for consideration prior to notification is Ex. A-1 dated 20-8-1973. It is a sale transaction for a small extent of land i.e., 175 Sq. y. for a consideration of Rs. 4,000/-. It works out to Rs. 1,10,629/- per acre, approximately. Exs.A-3 and A-4 are of the year 1949. Since the said transactions were of nearly 24 years prior to Ex.A-1, they cannot be taken as a comparable sale for the purpose of determining the compensation. Therefore, Exs.A-3 and A-4 have to be excluded. Then remains the other documents Exs. A-2, A-5, A-6, A-8, A-12, A-13, A-14( A-2) and A-16 which are of post-notification sales. The consideration that has been mentioned therein is taken into account and accordingly, it works out to 10% escalation on average per year. If the transactions are prior to the notification, the highest value depicted in the sale deed shall be taken into consideration for awarding compensation. If it is post notification sale, to find out the trend of the increase or standstill, we have to take into account the average, as in the case of small transactions, at certain times, the willing purchaser may pay high rate. Therefore, the average of sale transactions has to be taken into account to find out the escalation. If we take that into account, the increase will be about on an average, Rs. 10% per year. If Rs. 1,10,629/- rounded off to Rs. 1,11,000/- is taken into account by the date of notification i.e., 29-10-1975 (for about 2 years 7 months) and the increased rate of 10% per year is applied 28% (11+11+6) increase will come to Rs. 31,800/- which can rounded off to Rs. 32,000/-. That is Rs. 1,11,000/ - plus Rs. 32,000/- comes to Rs. 1/13,000/-. Normally when small transactional rates are applied to transactions of huge extents, the Supreme Court has pointed out that the percentage must be between 30% and 40%. If we take 1/3rd as the basis by giving sufficient margin, it will come approximately to Rs. 47,600/-rounded of to Rs. 47,000/-. If the said amount of Rs. 47,000/- is deducted from Rs. 1,43,000/- it-will come to Rs. 96,000/-. Therefore, we feel Rs. 96,000/- per acre would be the reasonable amount of compensation that can be determined as on the date of Section 4(1) notification. We accordingly fix the amount of Rs. 96,000/ - per acre as compensation to be awarded. Since the judgment under appeal was rendered in September, 1982, the claimant is entitled for the benefits of solatium at 30% and interest at 9% per annum from the date of taking possession of the land for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of deposit. (In this case, possession was taken on 30-4-1981.) The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. No costs.