IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2850-2852 OF 2001

Bommineni Sanjeeva Reddy & Ors.        ...Appellant(s)

Versus

The Land Acquisition Officer       ...Respondent(s)

With Civil Appeal No.1714/2002 and Civil Appeal No.6959/2002

O  R  D  E  R

Civil Appeal No.6959 of 2002:

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order.

The civil appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

No costs.

Civil Appeal Nos.2850-2852 of 2001 and 1714 of 2002:

By notifications issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

[hereinafter referred to as “the Act”], the Government of Andhra Pradesh acquired

lands of the appellants in different villages of Warangal district for construction of

the  canals  of  Sriramsagar  Project.   The  Land  Acquisition  Officer  awarded

compensation @ Rs.11,200/- per acre for dry lands and Rs.14,000/- per acre for wet

lands.  On the applications filed by the appellants under Section 18 of the Act, the

reference court, after considering the evidence produced by the parties including the

award  made  in  relation  to  similar  acquisition,  enhanced  the  compensation  from

Rs.11,200/-  to  Rs.  22,500/-  per  acre  for  the   dry  lands  and  from Rs.  14,000/-  to

Rs.25,000/- per acre for the wet lands.   

...2/-

- 2 -  

The Land Acquisition Officer challenged the orders of the reference court

in A.S. Nos. 594/1999 and 837/1999 respectively.  The appellants herein filed cross-

objections for further enhancement of compensation.  By the impugned order, the

High  Court  dismissed  the  appeals  and  cross-objections.   Hence,  these  appeals  by

special leave.

During the pendency of these appeals, the appellants filed I.A. Nos. 5-7 of

2008  for  producing  additional  evidence  in  the  form  of  judgments  (marked  as

Annexures-P1 to P6 and P8) rendered by the High Court in cases involving award of

compensation in  lieu  of  acquisition  of  land for  construction of  different  canals  of

Sriramsagar Project, four orders passed by this Court in special leave petitions filed

against the judgments of the High Court and copy of G.O.Ms. No.56 dated 23.4.2002

issued by the State Government for payment of compensation of the land acquired for

construction by Sriramsagar Project - Flood Flow Canal.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

A perusal  of  the  documents  filed  with  IA Nos.  5-7/2008  shows  that  by

judgments  (Annexure-P3  to  P6)  dated  18.7.2001,  5.10.2001,  7.11.2001,  different

Division  Benches  of  the  High  Court  allowed the  appeals  filed by the  landowners,

whose lands were acquired by notifications issued under Section 4 of the Act in 1987

and early 1988 and enhanced the compensation payable to them from Rs.22,500/- to

Rs.40,000/- per acre for dry lands and from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.42,000/- per acre for the

wet lands.  Annexure P-13 is the copy of order dated 18.11.2005 passed by this Court

in Special Leave Petition © Nos. 21065-21071 of 2003 whereby this Court enhanced

the compensation payable to the landowners to Rs.40,000/- per acre for the dry lands

and Rs.42,000/- per acre for the wet lands.    

Since, the lands of the appellants were acquired in the year 1985 whereas

the  cases  in  which  higher  compensation  was  awarded  (almost  two  times  the

compensation awarded to the

...3/-

- 3 -  

appellants), acquisitions were made in 1987 and early part of 1988, we feel that ends

of justice would be met if the compensation payable to the appellants is enhanced and

fixed @ Rs.35,000/- per acre for the dry lands and Rs.37,000/- per acre for the wet

lands.

Accordingly, the appeals are allowed in part.  The compensation payable

to  the  appellants  in  lieu  of  acquisition  of  their  land  is  enhanced  in  the  manner

indicated above and the respondents are directed to pay enhanced compensation, i.e.,

@ Rs.35,000/- per acre for dry lands and Rs.37,000/- per acre for the wet lands to the

appellants, who shall also be entitled to consequential benefits under the Act.   

No costs.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, March 25, 2009.