THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO APPEAL SUIT NO.1434 of 1999 JUDGMENT : ( per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J ) The appeal suit is filed by the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam, against the judgment and decree dated 28-9-1995 passed in OP No.152 of 1985 by the Subordinate Judge, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District. 2. The brief facts of the case are:- the land of the claimant- respondent herein to an extent of Ac.0.20 cents (wet land) situated in Sy.No.15/20 of Block No.1, Gavarapalem Ward, Anakapalli, was acquired for the formation of bye-bass road at NH 5. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award being award No.2 of 1984, dated 28-3-1984 granting compensation at Rs.16,666/- per acre. The claimant-respondent herein received the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer under protest and sought for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation. On reference, the civil Court taken the same on file being OP No.152 of 1985. The claimant in support of his case examined himself PW-1 and two other witnesses and marked exhibits A-1 and A-2 and on behalf of the LAO, RW-1 was examined. Ex.C-1 and C-2 were marked. 3. The reference Court by the impugned judgment and decree enhanced the compensation from Rs.16,666/- per acre to Rs.49,000/- per acre. Hence this appeal by the State. 4. Heard the learned Government Pleader for Appeals and the learned counsel for the respondent-claimant. 5. The lands in question and other lands to an extent of Ac.3-99 cents situated at Block No.1, Gavarapalem Ward, Anakapalli, was acquired for the formation of bye-bass road at NH 5. The land in question is a piece of wet land to an extent of Ac.0.20 cents. The reference Court considering the sale transactions under Ex.A-1 and A-2 under which lands to an extent of Ac.0.20 cents and Ac.0.05 cents respectively was sold under registered sale deeds for Rs.1.50 lacs and Rs.1 lac respectively and also considering the proximity of the said lands situated under Ex.A1 and A2 and the acquired lands enhanced the compensation to Rs.49,000/- per acre. Admittedly the land in question was a wet land and it has come in the evidence of the claimant that it was a fertile land and used to get two crops in a year. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any flaw in the compensation arrived at by the reference Court. The appeal is meritless and it is accordingly dismissed. The claimant is entitled to all statutory benefits. No order as to costs. ___________________________ Ghulam Mohammed, J __________________________ Nooty Ramamohana Rao,J Dated :21-12-2009 Nrg.