HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD and HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR A.S.No.2068 of 1998 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.G.Shankar) An extent of Ac.3.19 ½ guntas of land in various survey numbers of Katrepalli village in Warangal district was acquired for excavation of Tail channel of Kakatiya main canal. Notification under Section 4(1) was published on 29.02.1988. The award was passed on 02.02.1989. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of the acquired property at Rs.6,000/- per acre. The claimants who are the appellants herein received compensation under protest and got the award referred to the Civil Court for determination of the market value. Through the impugned award, the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Warangal determined the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.28,000/- per acre. Contending that the enhancement was unjust and improper, Government preferred the present appeal. Smt. A.B.Lalitha, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Appeals for the appellant and Sri B.Narayana Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents advanced their submissions. It may be noticed that the reference Court followed a judgment of this High Court in various common appeals, a certified copy of which was marked as Ex.A.2. A Division Bench of this Court determined market value of the acquired lands in that case at Rs.22,500/-. The lands under acquisition and the lands covered by the common judgment in Ex.A.2 relate to the same area and they are of similar potency. In fact, the Principal Subordinate Judge, Warangal followed Ex.A.2 and awarded compensation in another acquisition proceedings, the certified copy of which was marked as Ex.A.1. Placing reliance upon Ex.A.1 as well as Ex.A.2, the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Warangal, determined the initial market value of the acquired property at Rs.22,500/- to work out the exact market value. The acquisition in relation to Ex.A.2 was of the year 1984. The present acquisition as already noticed, took place in the year 1988. Taking the view of the Supreme Court into consideration that the market value deserves to be enhanced on the strength of the period passed between the date on which the value of the property could be ascertained and the date of acquisition @ 10% per annum, the learned trial Judge arrived at the value of the acquired property at Rs.32,000/- per acre, as the acquisition in the present case was four years after the acquisition in the case under Ex.A.2. However, although the Supreme Court considered that 10% p.a. deserves to be the escalation in the market value, the learned Senior Civil Judge considered it appropriate to increase the market value at 5% p.a. only. On such a calculation from the basic market value of the acquired land at Rs.22,500/- per acre, the reference Court came to the conclusion that the value of the acquired property is at Rs.28,000/- per acre. The reference Court granted statutory benefits like additional market value and solatium together with interest thereof. The limited question, therefore, is as to what exactly is the market value of the acquired property. When the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Warangal acted more conservatively in enhancing the basic market value by 5% p.a., taking the basic market value on the strength of Ex.A.2, the value as determined by the reference Court does not deserve to be interfered with. There is no justification for the Government to seek further reduction of the market value as determined by the reference Court. The value as determined by the reference Court indeed is less than the market value, in view of the rate of increase in the market value adopted by the reference Court viz-a-viz the view of the Supreme Court. The judgment impugned therefore does not deserve to be interfered with. There are no merits in the appeal. This appeal therefore is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD,J ________________ K.G.SHANKAR,J 18th January, 2011. PNV