Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Land Acquisition Officer/Revenue ... vs Lavoori Deshya And Ors. on 19 July, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002(5)ALD129, 2003(4)ALT326, (2002) 4 ICC 460, AIR 2003 (NOC) 132 (AP), 2003 A I H C 43, (2003) 1 LACC 467, (2002) 5 ANDHLD 129, (2003) 4 ANDH LT 326, (2002) 2 ANDHWR 540
JUDGMENT Dalava Subrahmanyam, J.
1. The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Revenue Divisional Officer, Miryalguda, Nalgonda District (for short 'the LAO') filed A.S.No.3286 of 2000 against the decree and award dated 26-8-2000 passed in OP No.59 of 1994 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda in enhancing the compensation at Rs.55,000/- per acre for the lands acquired with solatium and further interest from 8-2-1971 at 9% per annum for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation.
2. The LAO, Miryalguda filed AS No. 1157 of 2001 against the decree and award dated 17-1-2001 passed in OP No.57 of 1994 in enhancing the compensation at Rs.55,000/- per acre for the acquired lands with solatium and further interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation.
3. Writ Appeals 1417 of 1997 and 1431 of 1997 were tiled by the Government against the common order dated 14-9-1995 passed in WP No. 12276 of 1994 and WP No.17858 of 1995 in directing the LAO to pay interest at 9% per annum from 8.2.1971 for a period of one year till 8.2.1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation for the lands acquired.
4. WA No.608 of 1998 was filed by the LAO against the order dated 27-3-1996 passed in WP No.2551 of 1996 in directing the respondents to pay interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 to 8-2-1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum from 9-2-1972 till the date of realisation for the lands acquired.
5. WA No. 424 of 1999 was filed by the LAO against the order dated 17-4-1996 in WP No.7377 of 1996 in directing the LAO to pay interest at 9% per annum from 8.2.1971 to 8.2.1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation for the lands acquired.
6. The brief facts of the above cases are as follows:
7. The Government acquired an extent of Ac. 159.08 guntas of wet land for extension of tank called 'Bhairavuni cheruvu' situated in several survey numbers in Damaracherla village and Mandal in Nalgonda District, out of which an extent of Ac.101.05 1/2 guntas of land belong to the claimants in OP No.59 of 1994 and the remaining extent of land belong to the claimants in O.P.No. 57 of 1994 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda. The LAO issued notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') on 8-11-1990. The LAO held enquiry with regard to the market value and, after conducting the enquiry, adopted the comparable sale transactions and passed an award on 24-11-1992 fixing the market value for the acquired lands at Rs 12.5007- per acre. Advance possession of these lands were taken on 8-2-1971 invoking the urgency clause contemplated under Section 17 (3-A) of the Act. Most of the claimants belong to Scheduled Tribe and their sole livelihood was lost. They were raising two crops in an year and getting yield of 40 bags of paddy per year per acre and the total annual income comes to Rs. 10,000/- per acre. Damaracherla village is situated on either side of the State High way leading from Hyderabad to Guntur by crossing Krishna river. It is a Mandal head quarter since 1985. After establishing Mandal head quarters, it has become a commercial center. The LAO after giving an opportunity to the claimants and after hearing fixed the market value at Rs. 12,5007- per acre and also awarded interest at 4% per annum for some period and at 6% per annum for the remaining period. The claimants filed WPNo. 12276 of 1994, WP No.17858 of 1995, WP No.2551 of 1996 and WP No.7377 of 1996. After hearing both sides, the writ petitions were allowed directing the LAO to pay interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 for a period of one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation. Aggrieved against the said orders in the above writ petitions, WA No. 1431 of 1997. WA No.1417 of 1997, WA No.608 of 1998 and WA No.424 of 1999 were filed. Meanwhile, the claimants claimed enhancement of compensation and their claim petitions were referred to the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda and the learned Senior Civil Judge passed an award in OP No.57 of 1994 and OP No.59 of 1994 enhancing the compensation for the lands acquired at Rs. 55,000/- and further directing the respondents to pay interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 till 8-2-1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation.
8. Aggrieved against the decree and award in OP No.59 of 1994 and 57 of 1994, the LAO filed AS Nos.3286 of 2000 and 1157 of 2001 contending that the award passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda was against law and perverse to the facts of the case. The Senior Civil Judge committed an error in fixing the market value at the rate of Rs.55,000/- per acre, which was arrived on assumptions and presumptions and not based on any evidence. The Senior Civil Judge committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the claimants are entitled to interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 to 8-2-1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation. The trial Court failed to appreciate that the burden of proof is on the claimants to plead and establish that the acquired lands were wet and fertile lands yielding 40 bags of paddy per acre as on the date of taking possession. The acquired lands in these cases are not comparable to the lands which were also acquired in OP Nos.39 of 1989 and 46 of 1988. The reference Court failed to give any cogent and valid reasons while fixing the market value at the rate of Rs.55,0007- per acre for the acquired lands.
9. The LAO filed writ appeals 1431 of 1997, 1417 of 1997, 608 of 1998 and 424 of 1999 against the orders passed in WP No.12276 of 1994, WP No.17858 of 1995, WP No.2551 of 1996 and WP No.7377 of 1996 in directing the LAO to pay interest at 9 % per annum from 8-2-1971 to 8-2-1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of realisation. It was contended in the said appeals that the learned single Judge failed to notice that the statutory provisions under the Act with regard to the payment of interest under Section 34 of the Act and as per Section 30(3) of the Amendment Act, which is transitional provisions, came into force from 30.4.1982. The learned single Judge erred in granting interest at 9% per annum from the date of taking possession i.e., 8-2-1971 for one year and at 15% per annum thereafter.
10. Since all these writ appeals and first appeals involve common question of law and facts, they are discussed together and a common judgment is delivered.
11. Now the following points arise for consideration in all the above matters.
1. Whether the enhancement of compensation at Rs.55,0007- per acre by the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda while fixing the market value of the acquired lands is just and proper?
2. Whether the Senior Civil Judge committed error in awarding interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 to 8-2-1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum on the market value of the acquired lands and the Senior Civil Judge is not justified in awarding the said interest in view of amended provision of Section 34 of the L.A. Act read with 30(3) of the Amendment Act, 1984, and if so, at what rate?
3. To what relief?
Point No. 1:
12. The Government acquired an extent of Ac.159.08 guntas of wet land for extension of a tank called 'Bhairavuni Cheruvu" situated in various survey numbers of Damaracherla village, which are the subject-matter in OP No.59 of 1994 and OP No.57 of 1994. By invoking urgency clause, the lands were taken possession on 8-2-1971. Subsequently, notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 8-11-1990 and the LAO after conducting enquiry passed an award on 24-11-1992 fixing the market value at Rs.12,500/- per acre. The claimants received the compensation awarded under protest and claimed enhancement of compensation and their claims were referred to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Act and the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda in OP No.59 of 1994 and OP No.57 of 1994 passed awards and aggrieved against the said awards passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda, AS Nos.3286 of 2000 and 1157 of 2001 were filed by the Government.
13. The acquired lands are situated in Damaracherla village and it is Mandal Head Quarters since 1985. Due to passing of railway track through the Mandal Head Quarters, it has become a commercial center. There is also Rasi Cement Factory situated at a distance of 3 K.Ms away from Damaracherla village. On earlier occasion, the Government acquired an extent of Ac.70.00 of land for the purpose of construction of railway track and an award was passed in OP No.39 of 1989 and subsequently, the compensation was enhanced and market value was fixed at Rs.52,000/- per acre for these lands. The Government also acquired another Ac.40.00 of agricultural land in Kondrapole village, adjoining to the acquired lands, and in OP No. 46 of 1988 compensation was awarded at Rs.40,000/- per acre. But, the LAO fixed the market value at Rs.12,500/-per acre for the acquired lands ignoring the registered sale deeds available for comparison.
14. PWs.1 to 6 were examined on behalf of the claimants and Exs. Al to A15 were marked. The Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-LAO examined himself as RW1 and Exs.Bl, B2 and XI to X4 were marked. The LAO took 30 sale transactions into consideration and out of mem, he took sale transactions relating to S.Nos.205, 202 and 212 and fixed the market value at Rs.12,500/- per acre. The Senior Civil Judge discussed the evidence of PWs.1 to 6 and the documents filed and relied on by the claimants. Ex.A1l is the certified copy of the award in OP No.39 of 1989 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda. Ex.A13 and A15 are the certified copies of the decree passed in OP No.46 of 1988 and AS No.2749 of 1990 respectively. The subject-matter of the lands acquired under OP No.39 of 1989 and OP No.46 of 1988 are nearby to the lands under acquisition. The Senior Civil Judge relied on the market value fixed for the lands acquired in OP No.39 of 1989 and OP No.46 of 1988 and considering the escalation of price of land at 10% per annum, fixed the market value for the lands acquired at Rs.55,000/- per acre relying on the decision in V.Veerabhadra Rao v. LAO and Special Deputy Collector, East Godavari District, . The Senior Civil Judge compared several sale transactions that took place from time to time and after appreciating the entire oral and documentary evidence on record, rightly fixed the market value at Rs.55,000/-per acre. The award passed by the Senior Civil Judge insofar as fixing the market value at Rs.55,000/- per acre is well considered and therefore there are no tenable grounds to set aside the said findings. For the above reasons, the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda has not committed any error in fixing the market value at Rs.55,000/- per acre and therefore we do not consider it necessary to interfere with the said findings and we confirm the said rate fixed by the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda.
Points 2 and 3:
15. The Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda after fixing the market value directed the LAO to pay interest at 9% per annum for one year from the date of taking possession and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of payment.
16. The learned Additional Advocate-General contended that the claimants are not entitled to interest at 9% per annum from 8-2-1971 to 8-2-1972 and thereafter at 15% per annum in view of Section 30 (3) of the Amendment Act, 1984.
17. Section 34 of the Act contemplates payment of interest. The provisions with regard to the payment of interest is as follows:
34. Payment of interest:--When the amount of such compensation is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land, the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with interest thereon at the rate of 4% per annum from the time of so taking possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited.
18. Government of Andhra Pradesh adopted the amendment made by Madras Act XII of 1953. Section 34 was amended and to be read for the words "six per centum' substitute the word 'four per centum. At the end of Section 34 a proviso was added, which is as follows:
"Provided that where such possession is taken before the commencement of the Land Acquisition, the foregoing provision shall have effect as if for the rate of four per centum per annum specified therein the rate of six per centum per annum had been substituted".
The learned advocates appearing for the claimants contended that a liberal interpretation has to be given to the amended Section 34 read with 30(3) of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984. The learned advocates appearing for the claimants relied on several decisions of the Apex Court wherein interest was awarded from the date of taking possession. In all those cases, there was no occasion to consider and interpret the amended provision of Section 34 read with 30(3) of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984.
19. Government of Andhra Pradesh enacted Act 68 of 1984 (for short "the Amendment Act'), which was published on 24-9-1984. The Amendment Act came into force on 24-9-1984. Section 30 of the Amendment Act provides transitional provisions, which are as follows:
30. Transitional provisions :--(1) The provisions of Sub-section (1-A) of Section 23 of the principal Act, as inserted by clause (a) of Section 15 of this Act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to,--
(a) every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the principal Act pending on the 30th day of April, 1982 (the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People), in which no award has been made by the Collector before that date;
(b) every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the Principal Act commenced after that at whether or not an award has been made by the Collector before the date of commencement of this Act.
(2) The Provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 23 and Section 28 of the Principal Act, as amended by Clause (b) of Section 15 and Section 18 of this Act respectively, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to and in relation to, any award made by the Collector or Court or to any order passed by the High Court or Supreme Court in appeal against any such award under the provisions of the Principal Act after the 30th day of April, 1982 (the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People) and before the commencement of this Act.
(3) The provisions of Section 34 of the Principal Act, as amended by Section 20 of this Act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to,--
(a) every case in which possession of any land acquired under the Principal Act had been taken before the 30th day of April, 1982 (the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People) and the amount of compensation for such acquisition had not been paid or deposited under Section 31 of the Principal Act until such date, with effect on and from that date; and
(b) every case in which such possession has been taken on or after that date but before the commencement of this Act without the amount of compensation having been paid or deposited under the said Section 31, with effect on and from the date of taking such possession,
20. The learned Additional Advocate-General Sri Ramesh Ranganathan contended that Section 30(3) of the Amendment Act contemplates that the claimants are entitled to interest from 30.4.1982 at 9%. He relied on the words occurring under Section 30 (3) (a) of the Amendment Act which provides 'until' such date, with effect on and from that date" of taking such possession under Section 30(3) (a) and (b).
21. The learned advocates appearing for the respondents cited several decisions of the Apex Court wherein interest was awarded from the date of taking possession even prior to 30-4-1982.
22. We have gone through the decisions of the apex Court which are relied on by the Advocates for the respondents. The provisions of Section 30 (3) (a) and (b) of the Amendment Act was not considered and interpreted in those decisions. Therefore, it is necessary to interpret the provisions of Section 34 of the Act read with Section 30(3)(a) and (b) of the Amendment Act by this Constitutional Bench.
23. The learned Additional Advocate General cited a decision reported in APLJ 1990 (1) page 235 Cement Corporation of India Limited Adilabad represented by its General Manager Sri M.J Siddiqui v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Adilabad and Ors., wherein a Division Bench of this Court had an occasion to consider the applicability of the provisions of Section 30(3) of the Amendment Act. This Court took the view that by virtue of amended Section 34 of the Act r/w Section 30 (3) of the Amended Act, the interest payable on the compensation is from the date when the amended Act came into force. The transitional provisions of Section 30 (3) of the Amended Act is not interpreted directly in the said decision. The apex Court in Special Tahsildar (LA) P. W.D Schemes, Vijayawadav. M.A, Jabbar, had an occasion to consider the Amendment Act 68 of 1984. It was held "even though the Amendment Act was prospective and the transitory provision had only retro limited activity". Considering the above provisions and after hearing the Additional Advocate-General and the Counsel for the respondents, we are of the view that the intention of the Legislature was only to give benefits for the lands acquired before 30-4-1982 till the date of the new Act came into force i.e., 24-9-1984. The words "from that date" would only imply 30-4-1982 but not prior date. For the above said reasons, we hold that the claimants are entitled to the benefits of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 only from 30-4-1982 and the interest awarded prior to 30-4-1982 by the lower Court at the rate of 9% for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum is not maintainable, but they are entitled to the interest as per the Madras Act XII of 1953 i.e., at the rate of 4% per annum only.
24. In the result, AS Nos.3286 of 2000 and 1157 of 2001 are partly allowed without costs and Writ Appeals 1431 of 1997, 1417 of 1997, 608 of 1998 and 424 of 1999 are allowed without costs. The enhanced compensation awarded and fixed by the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalguda in OP No.59 of 1994 and O.P.No.57 of 1994 for the acquired lands at Rs. 55,000/- per acre with solatium at 30% is confirmed, but the award of interest is modified. The claimants are entitled to claim interest at 4% per annum from 8-2-1971 till 30-4-1982 and thereafter at 9% per annum for one year and thereafter at 15% per annum till the date of payment. The claimants are entitled to the balance of compensation after deducting the amounts already withdrawn by them from time to time. With this modification the above appeal suits and writ appeal are disposed of.