THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.154 OF 1999 Dated. 31-12-2010 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, Khammam …Appellant Vs. E.Gopaiah ..Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.154 of 1999 JUDGMENT (Per NRLN,J) This appeal is filed against the enhancement of the compensation in O.P.No.157 of 1987 on the file of the court of Subordinate Judge, Kothagudem relating to an extent of Ac.0.20 guntas of dry land situated in Sy.No.294/6 of Goraram Village, belonging to the claimant. An extent of Ac.15.14 guntas of land was acquired by the Government for formation of P.W.D road from Kothagudem to Lankapalli within the limits of Goraram village. A draft notification was issued and possession was taken in 1971 and an award enquiry was conducted and award was passed on 29-10-1985. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at Rs.1500/- per acre and as the claimants were not satisfied, the matter was referred to the civil court and the claimants contended that market value of the acquired lands is more and they getting annual income of not less than Rs.5,000/- to Rs.6,000/- per acre and claimed market value @ Rs.30,000/-. Along with this case, several other O.Ps were also clubbed together and a joint trial was conducted and the learned Subordinate Judge enhanced the market value at Rs.3,600/-. Aggrieved by the said order the present appeal is filed. The points that arise for consideration are:- (1) Whether the market value fixed by the learned Subordinate Judge is legal and sustainable? (2) To what relief? POINTS: The extent of the property involved in this appeal is only Ac.0.20 guntas and the difference of compensation is only very minimal. The learned Subordinate Judge after considering the evidence on record and the documents considered the award of the Land Acquisition Officer. According to him, the learned Subordinate Judge fixed the net income as not less than Rs.300/- even if it is a dry land and by applying capitalisation method, arrived the market value @ Rs.3,600/- per acre. The learned Subordinate Judge has given sufficient reasons and the method adopted by the learned Subordinate Judge in coming to the fixation of the market value, when there are no comparable sales which are acceptable, cannot be faulted. Therefore, we do not find any reasons to interfere with the order of the learned Subordinate Judge. Accordingly, the appeal suit is liable to be dismissed. The points are therefore answered. Accordingly, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J _______________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J 31-12-2010 TSNR