THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY C.R.P.No.317 of 2010 ORDER: The lands owned by the respondents, admeasuring Acs.3.41 cents, in survey Nos.473 & 475 (parts), situated in Parchur Village, was acquired through a notification published under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), on 27.06.1976. Award was passed by the petitioner herein on 27.11.1979 fixing the market value at Rs.11,000/-, per acre. Not satisfied with that, the respondents sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act. The petitioner acceded to the request and the reference was taken up as L.A.O.P.No.8 of 1982 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Chirala. Through its order, dated 30.04.1984, the trial Court enhanced the compensation by Rs.9,000/-, per acre. The same was upheld by this Court in A.S.No.2760 of 1984, vide its judgment, dated 10.04.1999. The respondents filed E.P.No.30 of 2000 for recovery of the enhanced amount of compensation. A calculation memo was filed. In all, the respondents claimed Rs.1,59,815/-. The petitioner, on the other hand, stated that the calculation memo submitted by the respondents is incorrect. Through order, dated 09.10.2006, the Executing Court allowed the E.P., and directed the petitioner to pay the amount claimed by the respondents. Hence, this revision. Learned Government Pleader for Arbitration submits that the calculation memo submitted by the respondents is incorrect. He contends that the compensation awarded by the petitioner herein, together with the statutory benefits, was paid, when the award was passed and instead of claiming the enhanced compensation of Rs.9,000/-, per acre, together with statutory benefits, the respondents made claim on the basis that the compensation is Rs.20,000/- per acre, as though nothing was paid earlier to the enhancement. He places reliance upon the judgment of this Court in A.P. Industrial Infrastructure Corporation Limited, Hyderabad v. Gurram Subba Rao[1]. Sri M.S.N.Prasad, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the Executing Court has referred to various contentions and took the view that the calculation memo is correct. There is no dispute as to the acquisition of the land of the respondents or the enhancement of compensation from Rs.11,000/- to Rs.20,000/-, per acre. If the compensation @ Rs.11,000/-, per acre together with statutory benefits, was paid along with the award, the respondents are entitled to claim the enhanced compensation @ Rs.9,000/-, per acre. The statutory benefits such as solatium, additional market value, are to be calculated only on the enhanced value of Rs.9,000/-, per acre. However, in the calculation memo, the entire exercise was undertaken by taking the market value of Rs.20,000/-, per acre, and calculating all the benefits from the date of notification, as though nothing was paid earlier. It is only at a later stage that the amount paid by the petitioner herein was deducted. Such an approach does not accord with the judgment rendered by this Court. Even now, this anomaly can be corrected. The petitioner has already deposited the amount involved. The Executing Court can undertake fresh exercise, duly taking into account the calculation memos that may be filed by both the parties. Hence, the C.R.P. is allowed and the order under revision is set aside. The matter is remanded to the trial Court for fresh consideration and disposal. It shall be open to the parties to file fresh calculation memos. The amount, which is now in deposit, shall await the outcome of the E.P. The trial Court shall pass orders in the E.P. within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dated: 01.07.2011 GJ [1] 2005 (4) ALD 828