THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.1107 OF 1998 Dated. 25-02-2011 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, Wanaparthy …Appellant Vs. Ramana and another ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.1107 OF 1998 JUDGMENT (Per NRLN,J) The Appeal is filed by the Land Acquisition Officer against the judgment dated 18-06-1990 in O.P.No.927 of 1985 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Gadwal, enhancing the value of the acquired land @ Rs.6,500/- per acre for dry land, Rs.12,000/- for wet land and Rs.10,000/- for well. A batch of O.Ps were tried and a common award was passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Gadwal. The land of the appellants is in Sy.No.165/A-2,A-3, C and D/3 of an extent of Ac.0.67 cents. The land was acquired for Somasila Project and situated at B.Veenapur village. The Land Acquisition Officer made an enquiry and fixed the market value and passed the award. The petitioners and another claimant were not satisfied with the claim of the market value and they claimed enhancmenet of the market value and accordingly a reference was made. After the reference on behalf of the claimants, PW.1 to PW.4 were examined and marked Exs.A-1 to A-26. On behalf of the Referring Officer, RW.1 was examined and no documents got marked. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Subordinate Judge has fixed the market value which is under challenge. The points that arise for consideration are:- 1. Whether the enhancement granted by the learned Subordinate Judge is legal and sustainable? 2. To what relief? POINTS: PWs.1 to 4 are the some of the claimants whose lands have been acquired and according to their evidence the lands are fertile and they are growing rich crops and getting good income, the cost of the well fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is too low. The lands come under submersion. The lower court has taken into consideration the award in O.P.No.149 of 1985 whereunder for the dry land situated at Karrapakula the market value was fixed at Rs.6,500/-. The lower court has also taken into consideration the fact that the award discloses the existence of a well and no compensation was given. The learned judge also taking into consideration a common award in O.P.No.565 of 1985 dated 09-04- 1990 passed by the same court, fixed the market value of the dry land at Rs.6,500/- and Rs.12,000/- for wet land and Rs.10,000/- for well. In fact that award has said to have become final and it relates to the lands in the village which adjoins the village B.Veeraur. Evidently, the extent of the land belonging to the claimant in this O.P is less than one acre. The difference of compensation is also less. The claimants are evidently agriculturists who lost their property and there is nothing to show that the award in the other O.Ps which were below under the common award have been challenged and any interference was made by this court. Therefore, taking into consideration the small relief granted by the lower court to the appellants who lost their land and particularly taking into consideration the lower court has granted sufficient reasons, we do not find any reason to interefere with the fixation of the market value by the learned Senior Civil Judge. Accordingly the points are answered. Therefore, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No order as to co0sts. ___________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J _______________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J 25-02-2011 TSNR