IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY APPEAL SUIT No.1962 OF 2000 Between: Land Acquisition Officer, Mandal Revenue Officer, Maripeda … Appellant And Guguloth Limba … Respondent This Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY APPEAL SUIT No.1962 OF 2000 JUDGMENT: - (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This appeal is filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity, “the Act”), by the Land Acquisition Officer-cum- Mandal Revenue Officer, Maripeda, questioning the enhancement of the compensation made by the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad in O.P.No.84 of 1996, dated 31.12.1999. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, acquiring an extent of Ac.2-20 guntas of land in survey No.236/B of Lachiya Thanda belonged to the claimant for providing house sites, was published in the gazette on 17.08.1992 and the possession of the same was taken on 26.02.1983. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 25.06.1983 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.4,000/- per acre with Solatium at 15% and interest at 4% on the awarded compensation. Claimant having not satisfied with the fixation of the market value, filed petition under Section 18 of the Act to refer the matter to civil Court for due determination of the compensation payable to the acquired land. On such reference being received by the civil Court, claimant appeared and filed claim statement claiming compensation at Rs.40,000/- per acre. In order to prove the inadequacy of the compensation, P.Ws.1 to 4 were examined on behalf of the claimant and Exs.A1 to A3 were marked. On behalf of the referring officer, one witness examined as R.W.1 and Exs.B1-application and B2–award proceedings were marked. P.W.1 who is the claimant deposed that by utilising the water from the well dug by him, they used to raise commercial crops or grains or pulses. He also deposed that he is a landless poor person having only the land which was acquired by the Government and the lands near to the vicinity of the land in acquisition was acquired for the purpose of house sites where the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation and when the claimants therein, who received the compensation under protest sought for a reference to the civil Court, the civil Court enhanced the compensation and fixed the market value at Rs.20,000/- per acre under Ex.A2 in O.P.No.86 of 1996, dated 24.04.1999. Similarly, for the lands acquired in O.P.No.44 of 1996, dated 24.04.1991 the civil Court fixed the market value at Rs.25,000/- per acre. Learned Government Pleader now submits that A.S.No.141 of 2000 filed against the enhancement of the compensation in O.P.No.86 of 1996 has been dismissed by this Court on 13.04.2010. Under Ex.A1 an extent of Ac.0-05 guntas of land was sold on 16.08.1979 at Rs.12,000/- per acre. Even if 10% escalation is given from 1979 for three years, it comes to Rs.3,600/- and the market value will be Rs.15,600/- per acre as on the date of draft notification. Taking into consideration, the enhancement of the compensation in O.P.No.86 of 1996, where the civil Court enhanced and fixed the market value at Rs.20,000/- per acre, the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.15,000/- per acre, in all probability the market value reflected as on the date of notification. In that view of the matter, we do not see any merit in the appeal preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer and is liable to be dismissed. It is needless to say that the claimant is entitled to all the statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation, as per the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India {AIR 2001 SC 3516}. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. __________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 27th April 2010 lmv