L SURYAPRAKASA RAO Vs. DT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER AND L A O
LAWS(APH)-1992-3-78
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 23,1992

L.SURYAPRAKASA RAO Appellant
VERSUS
DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, KAKINADA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

DINAGEPORE VS. GIRJA NATH ROY [REFERRED TO]
NATHAR HUSSAIN MEERA VS. DEPUTY COLLECTOR, USILAMPATHI [REFERRED TO]
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER VS. A.N.DAMODARA MUDALIAR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Radhakrishna Rao, J. - (1.)Ac.2-80 cents of land situated at Kunuru Agraharam covered by R.S. No.65/2 belonging to the claimant has been acquired by the Government for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections. The claimant himself volunteered and gave consent for the acquisition of the said land as early as on 22nd Jan. 1980. The Land Acquisition Officer inspected the site on 23rd June, 1983. The Notification was made in the Gazette under Section 4(1) of the Act on 21-3-84. Possession was taken on 23-4-84. The award was passed on 26-3-85. The L.A.O. duly considered the sales statistics, and came to the conclusion mat Rs.28,000/- per acre would be the reasonable compensation. On reference, the lower court granted at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per acre for the acquired land and Rs.56,500/- for the trees and Rs.7,000/- for the filter point.
(2.)Now the point for consideration in these appeals is whether the lower Court was right in enhancing the compensation and further whether the claimant is entitled to further enhancement in the compensation?
(3.)P.W.I is the claimant. He deposed that Ac.2-80 cents of land which was in his personal cultivation was acquired by the Government and that the said land is a dry land. He was raising commercial crops on the said land and that there are 45 coconut trees and one mango tree. P.W.2 is the cultivator of the adjacent land. P.W.3 is the vendor of Ex.A-7. P.W.4 is the Sugarcane Inspector. Hespoke about the cost of sugarcane in the year 1984-85. P.W.5 is the Agricultural Officer, Andhra Sugars Limited, Tanuku. P.W.6 is a resident of Kanuru Agraharam. According to him there is a bore-well in the acquired lands. Exs.A-1 to A-6 are the Adangals for the Fasli 1388 to 1395. Ex.A-7 dt.18-4-83 is the copy of the sale deed executed by one K. Peda Venkata Reddi in favour of D. Sitarama Chandra Murthy. It shows that Ac.0-05 cents of land was sold for Rs,500/- per cent. Ex. B-1 is the file and Ex.C-1 is the Commissioner's Report. So far as the ownership of the land and the number of trees lying on the said land, there is no dispute. With regard to the coconut trees, the lower court held that as there is no evidence on either side to show that all the 45 trees need not be felled, it would be reasonable to take the average of 35 trees as not necessarily to be felled as the value of the live trees and the rest 10 trees should be valued as the dead wood. As the dead wood will not fetch more than Rs.200/- per tree/ it fixed Rs.2,000/- for the 10 coconut tres and for the live coconut trees it fixed the value at Rs.1,500/- per tree and granted Rs.52,500/- for the 35 coconut trees. For the mango tree also it valued at Rs.100/- and multiplied the same with 20 thereby granting Rs.2,000/- for the mango tree.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.