THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO APPEAL SUIT No.3502 OF 2000 JUDGMENT: (Per NRLN,J) The appeal is filed against the Award in O.P.No.36 of 1989, dated 27.10.1999, passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, in reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. An extent of Ac.52-66 cents of land in Survey Nos.242/2, 243/2, 243/4, 271/1B and 272/1 of Suryaraopet Village were acquired for Nagarjuna Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited and a Gazette was given on 31.12.1986. The lands of the claimants are in Survey No.272/1 to an extent of Ac.12-18 ½ cents. The Land Acquisition Officer categorised the lands and granted compensation of Rs.30,000/- per acre under Category – II and passed the Award on 04.11.1987. The claimants were not satisfied with the amount granted by the Land Acquisition Officer and at their request reference was made. The claimants mentioned that the lands were fertile and potential, yielding good agricultural crops. There are Palmyrah trees and Toddy trees. The area in and around the acquired land is developed. This has got potentiality and the market value is not less than Rs.100/- per square yard and the lands are sold with such potentiality and requested the market value to be fixed at Rs.100/- per square yard. 2. On behalf of the claimants, C.Ws.1 to 4 are examined and marked Exs.A1 to A3. On behalf of the respondent, R.W.1 is examined and marked Exs.B1 to B5. 3. After considering the material on record, the learned Senior Civil Judge has enhanced the market value at the rate of Rs.33,000/- per acre with attendant statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the present appeal is filed. 4. The points that arise for consideration were: 1) Whether the market value fixed by the Senior Civil Judge is real and correct? 2) Whether the appellant is entitled for any further enhancement of market value? 5. Evidently this being a reference at the instance of the claimants for enhancement, the burden is on them to prove the potentialities of the land. Learned counsel for the appellant reiterated all the contentions raised before the lower Court and laid stress on the documents Exs.A1 to A3. Ex.A1 is a sale transaction, dated 17.03.1985, to an extent of 200 Square Yards; Ex.A2 is the sale transaction, dated 16.09.1985, to an extent of 322 Square Yards and Ex.A3 is a sale transaction, dated 22.07.1985, to an extent of 333 Square Yards. Except these documents and the oral evidence relied on by the appellant, there is no other independent evidence to support the claim of the appellant. No revenue record or cultivation accounts are filed to show the potentialities of the land or the yield from the same. The lower Court has considered the evidence of PW.1 and after taking into consideration the earlier acquisition and the Award L.A.No.3 of 1985, wherein the market value was fixed at Rs.30,000/-, the lower Court also taken into consideration the documents Exs.B4 and B5, which are prior to the notification in this case. As there was time lag between the two notifications, the learned Senior Civil Judge has given escalation value of 10 percent relying on the decision reported in Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittoor v. P. Narasimhulu Naidu and others[1]. 6. Evidently, Exs.A1 to A3 cannot be taken into consideration as only for a small extent of the land. There is absolutely no evidence about the potentialities of the land or the utility. The lower Court has rightly decided the matter by giving allowances of escalation and there is no reason to come to a different conclusion, since the appellant has failed to prove the market value as claimed. Therefore, we find that the judgment of the lower Court does not call for any interference. 7. Accordingly, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No costs. ____________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J __________________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO, J December 08, 2010 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD DATE:08.12.2010 PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO APPEAL SUIT No.3502 OF 2000 Between: Vasamsetti Satyamma .....APPELLANT AND Land Acquisition Officer – cum Revenue Divisional Officer and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO APPEAL SUIT No.3502 OF 2000 December 08, 2010 [1] 1998 (6) ALD 581 (D.B.)