- (1.) This petition arises from the judgment and decree of the High court of A. P. dated 20/12/1993, in Appeal No. 2698 of 1987 and the counter-appeal filed by the State. The land to the extent of 69 acres and 25 gunthas situated in Bhongir Municipality in Nalgonda District of Andhra Pradesh, was acquired to provide house sites. The notification under Section 4 (1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894 (for short "the Act") was published in the District Gazette, as amended by the local amendment on 4/3/1985. The possession thereof was taken on 27/3/1985 dispensing with the inquiry under Section 5-A. The Land Acquisition Officer (for short "the LAO") in his award dated 27/3/1985 determined the compensation to the lands varying between Rs 6,000. 00 to Rs. 10,000. 00 per acre. Though petitioners claimed at the rate of Rs. 40. 00 per sq. yd. , on reference under Section 18, the Subordinate Judge, Bhongir, determined the compensation at Rs. 10. 00 per sq. yd. , deducted Rs. 3. 00 towards developmental expenditure, and fixed the market value at Rs. 7. 00 per sq. yd. Dissatisfied therewith, the petitioner as also the State filed the appeals in the High court.
(2.) The High court after appreciation of documentary sale deeds and oral evidence relied on by the petitioners held that fixation of compensation by the reference court was fair and reasonable. Accordingly, dismissed both the appeals of the claimants as well as the State.
(3.) Learned counsel, Shri Prakash Reddy, in his usual thorough preparation and persuasive advocacy contended that though all the sale deeds are of small extents, since the lands are situated within the municipal limits, the sale transactions furnish the basis to determine the compensation as claimed at Rs. 40. 00 per sq. yd. and they cannot be rejected as being of small extents. He placed strong reliance on Ex. A-2, sale deed relating to the land in question dated 12/2/1985 and sale deeds, Exs. A-9, A-11 and A-17, etc. , relating to the lands in the neighbourhood. The High court after consideration of the entire evidence held thus: "Ex.a-2, which was strongly relied on by Shri Prakash Reddy, is dated 12/2/1985 in respect of 400 sq. yds. situated in one of the acquired survey numbers. The sale consideration is Rs. 16,000. 00 and it works out to Rs. 40. 00 per sq. yd. It was pointed out by Shri Krishna Koundinya that the vendor of the land covered by Ex. A-2 is none else than the 5th claimant and the sale was on 12/2/1985, which was just a few days prior to the publication of the notification under Section 4 (1 of the Act on 4/3/1985. Therefore, the said sale cannot form the basis for fixing the market value of a large extent of the land in question. Ex. A-4, which is a sale deed dated 13/12/1982, is in respect of a very small extent of 140 sq. yds. of land sold for Rs. 7,000. 00. Neither the vendor nor the vendee has been examined. Ex. A-5 sale deed covers an extent of 700 sq. yds. sold for Rs. 15,000. 00. The sale transaction took place on 23/2/1985, which was a few days prior to the notification. Ex. A-6 relates to the land situated in S. No. 1063 and the sale was on 28/2/1985 just prior to the notification. Ex. A-7 relates to a small extent of 167 sq. yds. of land situated in S. Nos. 121 and 123 and pertains to Ward no. 1 in Hasnabad area. Exs. A-9 to A-11 relate to S. Nos. 1041, 1075 and 1056 and they do not form part of the survey numbers of the acquired land and are situated in Hasnabad area and they too do not provide any useful guidelines for fixing the market value of the lands in question. Exs. A-13 and A-14 also relate to the sale of small extents of lands in Kisan Nagar and there is no evidence to show the distance between Kisan Nagar and the acquired lands. An extent of 35 sq. yds. was sold under Ex. A-17 and the sale was on 13/3/1985, just prior to the notification. The sale included a small extent of 35 sq. yds. with basement for Rs. 40,000. 00 and it is not possible to rely on this document, as there is nothing to show as to the value of the basement. The sales of lands in Gunj area under Ex. A-8 and a small extent of 300 sq. yds. situated behind the club under Ex. A-11, cannot form the basis for fixing the market value of a large extent of land situated far away from the said plots. Ex. A-15 is the judgment in OP No. 218 of 1983 dated 19-4-1984 relating to Survey No. 137 situated in Hasnabad. Ex. A-16 is the award dated 14/8/1982 and it relates to Survey Nos. 97 and 100. These documents are of no help in arriving at the market value of the acquired lands. We have examined the documents produced by the. claimants. Most of the sales covered by the said documents are effected a few days prior to the notification under Section 4 (1 of the Act, and they relate to small extents. Applying the 'minus factors' mentioned in the decision of the Supreme court referred to above, the largeness of the area under acquisition has to be considered as a 'minus factor'. The land acquired is a large extent of 69 acres and 25 guntas. The original claimants are six in number. It will not be possible for the claimants to find purchasers for such a large extent of land situated in town, even if they are made into plots and sold. The entire land is at a distance from the road without proper approach roads. The land is uneven and requires filling-up. It is also remote from the 139 developed localities like Gunj and market place. The acquired land cannot be compared to small bits of land situated near the Gunj and behind the club as evidenced by Exs. A-8, A-11 and A-17. The sites covered by Exs. A-15 and A-16 are near business localities and the entire land is contiguous to Ambedkar Nagar and Sriram Nagar, which are slum areas, and cannot fetch the same value covered by the sale deeds produced by the claimants. Excepting Ex. A-2, no other sale deeds covering the lands adjacent to the acquired lands, are produced. As observed earlier, under Ex. A-2 the vendor is Claimant No. 5, and as such, no reliance can be placed on the said document. ";