THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO A.S. No. 3404 of 2003 Oral Judgment: (Per N.V. Ramana, J,) This appeal by the State, represented by the Land Acquisition Officer, Undi, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2001 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, enhancing the compensation for the acquired land from Rs.16,000/- per acre to Rs.24,000/- per acre contending that the same is on the higher side and needs to be reduced. The land of the respondent-claimant in an extent of Acs.4.88 cents situated in R.S. No. 164/1, Aredu village, which is covered by fruit bearing mango and other trees, was acquired by the appellant- Government by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on 18.10.1977, for providing house sites to weaker sections of the society. The Land Acquisition Officer, conducted enquiry by following the procedure contemplated under the Act, and passed award dated 30.05.1983, fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.16,000/- per acre; Rs.45/- per year for each coconut tree, Rs.450/- for 10 years (Rs. 450/- x 32 trees = Rs.14,400); Rs. Rs.20/- per year for each mango tree, Rs. 320/- for 16 years (Rs. 320/- x 5 trees = Rs.1,600/-); Rs. 7.50 ps. per year for each palmyrah tree, Rs.60/- for eight palmyrah trees and Rs.20/- per year for the soap nut tree. The respondent-claimant received the compensation under protest and sought reference of the matter to civil Court under Section 18 of the Act. The Court below considering the rival contentions of the parties, by the judgment and decree dated 21.12.2001, enhanced the compensation for the acquired land to Rs.24,000/- per acre by giving escalation at the rate of 10% per annum on the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer for five years; Rs.1,000/- for each coconut tree i.e. Rs. 32,000/- for 32 coconut trees; Rs. 200/- for palmyrah tree i.e. Rs.1,600/- for eight palmyrah trees. The Court below rejected the claim of compensation by the respondent-claimant for one usiri tree, one soapnut tree and five mango trees, and in addition to that, the Court below awarded additional market value at the rate of 12% per annum for the period commencing from the date of publication of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act till the date of taking possession, solatium and interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of possession on the enhanced compensation for a period of one year and the rate of 15% per annum subsequently till the date the amount is paid or deposited into the Court. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-Government and the learned counsel for the respondent-claimant and perused the judgment under appeal. The contention of the appellant-Government that the enhancement of compensation for the acquired land made by the Court below from for Rs.16,000/- per acre to Rs.24,000/- per acre is on the higher side and needs reduction cannot be accepted. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act seeking to acquire the land in question was issued on 18.10.1977. The same was challenged before this Court in W.P. No. 12 of 1978. The said writ petition, by order dated 07.11.1978 was disposed of. Though award has to be passed by the Land Acquisition Officer within two years from the date of issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, he has not passed, and instead issued errata to the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 19.08.1981. Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting award enquiry, passed award on 30.05.1983. This Court had held that the date of errata to notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, has to be taken into consideration for the purpose of fixing the market value. The Land Acquisition Officer, in fixing the market value of the acquired land mainly relied upon Ex. B1-sale deed, under which, P.W.1 sold one acre of land at Rs.16,000/- per acre. Even though the respondent-claimant produced other evidence to show that the market value of the land was higher, the Court did not consider the same, and instead felt it appropriate to confirm the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.16,000/- per acre, relying upon Ex. B1-sale deed. However, as there was time gap of five years from the date of execution of Ex.B1-sale deed and the acquisition of the land on 19.08.1981, the date on which errata was issued to the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, the Court below felt it appropriate to grant 10% enhancement on the market value. Accordingly, while granting 10% enhancement for five years on the market value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs.16,000/- per acre, worked out the compensation to Rs.24,000/- per acre, and we find no reason whatsoever to interfere therewith. Insofar as compensation for the trees is concerned, since the Court below has enhanced the compensation for the trees considering the annual yield and for the period for which the tries would give the yield, we are of the considered opinion, there is no need to further enhance the compensation for the trees. Accordingly, we confirm judgment and decree under appeal passed by the Court below enhancing the compensation for the acquired land at Rs.24,000/- per acre and for the trees and other benefits as detailed in the impugned judgment. The respondent- claimant is entitled to all other statutory benefits. No costs. ________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. _________________ K.S. APPA RAO, J. Dated: 11th July, 2011 KSR