HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO APPEAL SUIT No.1018 of 2000 JUDGMENT:(per Honourable Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) This appeal is filed, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), by the Land Acquisition Officer against the order dated 22.11.1999 passed in L.A.O.P.No.123 of 1988 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ongole. Pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, various extents of lands in Mamidipalem Village, Ongole belonging to the respondents-claimants were acquired for formation of Summer Storage Tank, Phase-II. The Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.12 of 1988, dated 31.03.1988, fixing the market value at Rs.32,000/- and Rs.35,000/- per acre. The claimants, dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Officer, sought for a reference under Section 18 of the Act seeking enhancement of compensation from Rs.35,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- and the award has been accordingly referred and taken on file by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ongole in L.A.O.P.No.123 of 1988. The Reference Court disposed of the reference by order dated 22.11.1999 fixing the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre. Learned Special Government Pleader attached to the office of the Advocate General submits that the Reference Court erroneously relying on Exs.B.1 to B.6 and B.11 to B.17 enhanced the compensation from Rs.35,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/-. It is clear from Exs.A.3 and A.4 that the government had agreed to purchase the lands of the Endowments Department at Rs.1,00,000/- per acre for the very same purpose of Summer Storage Tank at Pellur village. The said lands were nearer to the lands under acquisition. The claimants filed Exs.B.1 to B.6 reflecting sale transactions of the lands acquired prior to the acquisition at Rs.1,50,000/-. When the government had voluntarily paid Rs.1,00,000/- per acre to the neighbouring lands situated, we do not see any justification to interfere with the award passed by the Reference Court. The appeal is liable to be dismissed on merits and, even otherwise, for non-payment of batta with detailed addresses of the respondents. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. V.ESWARAIAH,J K.S.APPA RAO,J Date:05.12.2011 usd