HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO A.S. No. 1015 OF 2002 BETWEEN The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector, L.A.unit, Huzurabad …Appellant/Referring Officer And Chinthireddy Lingareddy ….Respondent/claimant HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA. ELANGO A.S. No. 1015 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is preferred by the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer-cum-Special Deputy Collector, L.A.Unit, Huzurbad, aggrieved by the enhancement of the compensation made by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Huzurabad from Rs.6100/- per acre to Rs.24,000/- per acre, in the judgment dated 12.4.2000 passed in O.P.No. 44 of 1997. The land belonging to the respondent/claimant admeasuring Ac.4.37 guntas comprised in various survey numbers of Molangoor village in Keshavapatnam Mandal of Karimangvar district was acquired for the purpose of excavation of DBM-13 canal at Molangoor village. The draft notiﬁcation under Section 4(1) of the land Acquisition Act was published in the A.P. Gazettee on 26.10.1984. The Land Acquisition Oﬃcer after completing due and necessary formalities, ﬁxed the market value of the land acquired at Rs.6,100/- per acre and Rs.100/- per acre for the mango trees. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the claimants ﬁled an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking reference of the matter to the competent Civil Court for determination of the correct, adequate and reasonable market value of the land acquired. On such reference, the Reference Court registered the reference as OP.No.44 of 1997. In order to substantiate his claim for enhancement of compensation, the claimant examined P.Ws.1 and 2 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.3. On the other hand, in order to dislodge the claim of the claimant and to establish the market value ﬁxed and compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer as adequate, reasonable and suﬃcient, R.W.1 was examined and Exs. B.1 and B.2 were marked on his behalf. The Reference Court on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, enhanced and ﬁxed the market value of the land acquired at Rs.24,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said enhancement, the present appeal is preferred. . Heard the learned Counsel on both sides. Perused the material on record. During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the respondent/claimant brought to our notice the judgment of this Court dated 11-10- 2007 passed in L.A.A.S.No. 926 of 2007, wherein the Government by notiﬁcation dated 7.2.1985 acquired lands, which were the subject matter of O.P.No. 25 of 1997 on the ﬁle of the Senior Civil Judge, Huzurabad. In the aforesaid matter, a Division Bench of this Court ﬁxed the market value of the land acquired therein for the very same purpose of excavation of DBM-13 cancal. The learned Reference Judge taking into consideration the certiﬁed copies of the judgment and decree in OP.Nos.17 of 1997 and 78 of 1988 in respect of the lands situated in the same village, enhanced the compensation to Rs.24,000/-. The certiﬁed copy of the judgment and decree in OP.No. 17 of 1997 is also marked as Ex.A.3 in the matter on hand and further the certiﬁed copy of the sale deed at Ex.A.1 in OP.No.25 of 1997 was referred to as Ex,.A.1 and the same was taken into consideration as the basis for determination of the market value of the land acquired in the case on hand by the Reference Court as well as in the subject matter of LAAS.No. 926 of 2007. Inasmuch as the village from, which the lands acquired in the present and above referred matters is one and the same, and, the certiﬁed copies of the judgment and decree in OP.No. 17 of 1997 referred to in OP.No. 25 of 1997 was also the basis for determination of the market value of the lands acquired in the present matter, we have no hesitation to hold that the market value ﬁxed by the Reference court is proper and reasonable. We accept the same analogy to follow in the present matter also. In that view of the matter, We see no other ground to interfere with the judgment of the Court below and accordingly we conﬁrm the same following the judgment of this Court in LAAS.No.926 of 2007 dated11.10.2007. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. --------------------------------------- JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY ----------------------------------- JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Date: 10-06-2010. Msnr.