HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NO.1691 OF 2000 Dt.20.10.2010 Between: The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit (LAO) Warangal ..Appellant And Poreddy Sammireddy and others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NO.1691 OF 2000 JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition Unit (Land Acquisition Officer), Warangal, filed this appeal against the order, dated 2.12.1999, in O.P.No.82 of 1995 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal. Respondents herein are the claimants. The land of the claimants admeasuring to an extent of Ac.0.32 guntas of dry land in Sy.Nos.736, 144 and 145 situate at Nagaram, Pembarthy village of Hasanparthy Mandal, was acquired for the purpose of excavation of L.4 minor DBM 24 in the limits of Nagaram – Pembarthy villages, pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, the Act), dated 26.11.1990. After due enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer passed award No.33/1993-94, dated 28.5.1993, fixing the market value at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said fixation of the market value, the claimants filed application seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act and the Reference Court by the aforesaid order in O.P.No.82 of 1995 basing on the oral deposition adduced on behalf of the claimants and Ex.A-1 certified copy of the orders in the earlier O.Ps., wherein for the similar lands the Land Acquisition Officer also fixed compensation at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per acre, but whereas this Court under Ex.A-2 enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre apart from other statutory benefits, enhanced the compensation for the lands in question at Rs.20,000/- per acre apart from all other statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the same, the Land Acquisition Officer filed this appeal. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the appellant. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not see any ground to interfere with the order of the Reference Court. However, in the instant case, possession was taken prior to 4(1) notification. Therefore, we are of the view that the claimants are entitled to interest on the market value and other statutory benefits from the date of 4(1) notification. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed upholding the market value fixed by the Reference Court. However, the claimants are entitled to interest on the market value and other statutory benefits from the date of 4(1) notification. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 20.10.2010 kpr