IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH [27H] DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY & THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2607 of 2000 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer (Special Deputy Collector, Land Unit, Warangal … Appellant And: Ssmt. Aitharaju Yeshodamma & 3 others … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY & HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.2607 of 2000 JUDGMENT: [per AGR, J] This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Special Deputy Collector, L.A Unit, Warangal, questioning the enhancement of the compensation in OP No.187 of 1988 dated 13.04.1998 by the I-Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal. 2. The draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short ‘the Act’), acquiring Ac.11.34 guntas of land in Sy.Nos.257, 258, 259, 261, 262, 263, 266 and 238/2 of Chinnakodepaka village for providing house sites to the weaker sections, was published on 23.05.1983, followed by publication of the draft declaration under Section 6 of the Act in the Gazette on 10.06.1993. The Land Acquisition Officer, after complying the due formalities, passed an award on 22.09.1986 under Ex.B.1 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.10,000/- per acre. The respondents-claimants, having dissatisfied with the fixation of the market value, on receipt of compensation amount under protest, requested to refer the matter to the civil Court under section 18 of the Act for due determination of the market value. On such reference being made to the civil Court in OP No.187 of 1988, the claimants filed necessary claim statements, claiming compensation at Rs.20,000/- per acre. 3. In order to prove the market value, the claimants examined CWs.1 and 2 and marked Exs.A.1 to A.5. On behalf of the referring Officer, RW.1 was examined and Exs.B.1 and B.2 copy of the award and award proceedings were marked. 4. CW.1, who is the 4th claimant, testified that he worked as Patwari of Chinnakodepaka village during 1961 to 1978 and he is the grand son of the 5th claimant. The acquired lands are wet lands and they are irrigated through well in Sy.No.232/2, apart from drawing water from the local irrigation tank. They used to raise paddy crops and used to get agricultural income of Rs.40,000/- per year from the acquired lands. CW.2 deposed that she sold Ac.1.00 of wet land to Ponnam Lingaiah for a consideration of Rs.17,000/- per acre under the original of Ex.A.1 dated 07-02-1983 and she also sold dry land adjacent to the acquired land for Rs.500/- per gunta to Gaddam Veeraswamy. Exs.A.2 and A.3 are the agreements of sale executed by her, but the same were discredited by the reference Court. Under Ex.A.1 registered sale deed, CW.2 sold Ac.1.00 of land to one Ponnam Lingaiah, which is 3½ months prior to the issuance of notification. The same reflects the true market value prevalent as on the date of issuance of notification. In the absence of any contra evidence adduced and in the absence of any suggestion made to CW.2 that she related to claimants and the said sale deed was brought into existence, the same can safely be taken as comparable sale transaction for determination of the market value for the acquired land. Therefore, fixation of the market value by the reference Court, taking into consideration the market value prevalent as on that date, at Rs.17,000/- per acre, is just and reasonable for which the claimants are entitled to. 5. In the circumstances, we do not see any infirmities in fixation of the market value by the reference Court warranting interference by this Court and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 27.04.2010 Bss/lrkm