IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S. No.790 of 1998 Between: The Special Deputy Collector-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Land Acquisition Unit, SRSP, Peddapalli ..... APPELLANT AND Jatti Pochaiah and 10 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S. No.790 of 1998 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) This appeal under Sec.54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) is directed against the order in O.P.222/1987 dated 06.04.1995 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Peddapalli, Karimnagar District at the instance of the Land Acquisition Officer in enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.8,500/- per acre for dry lands and from Rs.6,800/- to Rs.11,500/- per acre for wet lands, contending that the enhancement of compensation made by the Reference Court is imaginary and without any basis and the compensation fixed by the Reference Court is based on the guess work alone. 2. The facts of the case are that the dry and wet lands of the respondents/claimants of an extent of Ac.6.36 gts situated in Wadakpur village, Sulthanabad taluq of Karimnagar District was acquired for the purpose of excavation and construction of ML6-R1 of D/83 in the village limits of Wadakpur, pursuant to the notification issued under Sec.4(1) of the Act dated 02.05.1980. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation under Award No.21/84-85 dated 16.08.1984 @Rs.4,000/- per acre for dry lands and @Rs.6,800/- for wet lands. In respect of trees and wells also compensation was awarded and the Reference Court did not enhance any compensation for the trees and wells but enhanced the compensation in respect of the acquired lands alone, as aforesaid. 3. The question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the compensation as enhanced by the Reference Court is excessive and without any basis. 4. It appears that while fixing the compensation in respect of the acquired land and while passing the award no sale transactions were available and therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer based on the potentiality and guess work alone fixed the compensation. It is not in dispute that two years subsequent to the said acquisition, certain other lands of the same village have been acquired for the purpose of excavation of SRSP canal which is the subject matter of Ex.A1 order dated 27.04.1995 in O.P.658/1983 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Karimnagar. 5. It is stated that the lands covered under Ex.A1 order were acquired pursuant to 4(1) notification issued on 13.02.1982 and the compensation was fixed @Rs.10,000/- per acre for dry lands. Therefore, the Reference Court relied on the said award of the Subordinate Judge, Karimnagar in O.P.658/1983 enhanced the compensation from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.8,500/- per acre for dry lands and from Rs.8,500/- to Rs.11,500/- per acre for wet lands taking into consideration the fact that the acquired lands are situated adjacent to the acquired lands covered under Ex.A1. As there were no sale transactions available by the time of acquisition of lands and passing of award, it cannot be said that the subsequent acquisition proceedings cannot be taken into account as guiding principle. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Reference Court rightly based on the subsequent acquisition proceedings assessed the compensation. 6. In that view of the matter, we do not see any grounds to interfere with the impugned order. The Appeal Suit is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J _________________ NOUSHAD ALI,J Dated: 07.09.2010 Dsr