THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR APPEAL SUIT NO.1206 OF 1998 Date: 22nd December, 2011 Between: The Tahsildar, Prathipadu …..Appellant And Kilari Subba Rao …..Respondent THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR APPEAL SUIT No.1206 OF 1998 JUDGMENT:- (Per HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR) The Tahsildar, Prathipadu filed this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short Act) questioning the enhancement granted questioning the enhancement granted in a reference under Section 18 of the Act by the Court of Principal Subordinate Judge, Guntur (Reference Court) by its order dated 29.2.2006 in L.A.O.P.No.212 of 1984. 2. The total extent of Acs.7-55 cents in various survey numbers in Kopparru Village of Guntur District was acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections. The date of Section 4(1) notification is 18.4.1981. 3. The Land Acquisition Officer in his award fixed the compensation @ 15,000/- per acre. The present reference under Section 18 of the Act pertains to Ac.1-67½ cents in survey No.279/2-A of Kopparru Village. The Reference Court relied upon Ex.B-1 sale deed dated 21.3.1981 in respect of Ac.1-50 cents in survey No.255/4 of Kopparru Village whereunder the said land was sold for a consideration of Rs.45,000/- and that works out to Rs.30,000/- per acre. 4. The Reference Court found that Ex.B-1 land is in the vicinity of the acquired land and a comparable sale as it is nearly a month before the date of Section 4(1) notification. It also gave elaborate reasons to conclude that the Land Acquisition Officer did not lead any contra evidence to show that Ex.B.1 sale was not a normal sale and that further nothing was also elicited from R.W.2 to show that it cannot be relied upon. The learned Government Pleader also could not point out any convincing reason to show that the above conclusion of the Reference Court is against evidence. We are therefore of the opinion that the Reference Court rightly relied upon Ex.B1 in enhancing the compensation to Rs.30,000/- per acre. 5. We, accordingly, find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. This appeal is therefore dismissed with costs. __________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J _____________________ N.RAVI SHANKAR,J 22nd December 2011 TJMR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR APPEAL SUIT NO.1206 OF 1998 JUDGMENT:- (Per HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR) Date: 22nd December, 2011