HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD A.S.No. 2069 of 2001 Date: 31-01-2011 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer (Revenue Divisional Officer), Penukonda. ……… Appellant and S. Subba Reddy ……….. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD A.S.No. 2069 of 2001 ORDER: (Per BPR, J) The State, through the Land Acquisition Officer (RDO), Penukonda, preferred this Appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’), assailing the correctness of the order, dated 02-02-2001 passed in O.P.No.16 of 1997 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri. Briefly, the facts are that in pursuance of the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Act, the land of the claimant to an extent of Ac.2-00 in Sy.No.53-1A of Venkatapuram village, was acquired by the Government for the purpose of providing house sites to the villagers. Thereafter the Land Acquisition Officer, after holding due enquiry, passed award fixing the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.20,000/- per acre. The claimants-respondents herein, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, sought for reference and accordingly, the matter was referred to the Court below under Section 18 of the Act. In the Court below, the claimant-respondent herein examined PWs.1 to 3 and marked Exs.A-1 and A-2, whereas on behalf of the respondent-appellant herein, RW-1 was examined and Ex.B-1, award, was marked. The Court below, by taking into account the oral and documentary evidence adduce by both parties, came to the conclusion that the market value can be fixed at Rs.30,000/- per acre, and fixed accordingly. Though it is contended on behalf of the appellant that the extents of the lands in Exs.A-1 and A-2 are meager and they would not in any way show the correct market value and therefore, the Court below should not have accepted the same, and thus, in the absence of any valid material, the market value fixed by the Appellant does not warrant for any enhancement. The learned counsel for the claimant-respondent herein contended that the acquired land of the claimant is in Sy.No.53-1A, whereas the lands covered under Exs.A-1 and A-2 are in Sy.No.64/3 and that itself shows the proximity and especially in the absence of any evidence on behalf of the Appellant in rebuttal, there is nothing wrong in accepting the same by the Court below for the purpose of fixing the market value. Having heard the counsel on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, we are of the view that especially there being no attempt on behalf of the Appellant herein to come forth with any sale transactions by filing the copies of the sale deeds etc., it is not open for them to assail the market value as fixed by the Court below. Further, Exs.A-1 and A-2, which are almost 4 to 5 years prior to the date of notification, themselves shows that the lands therein were sold in small plots, which is enough for the purpose of taking as a basis for fixing the market value. Further, as the present enhancement is only from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.30,000/- per acre, on the face of it, we do not find any error and the Court below was right in fixing the market value at Rs.30,000/- per acre, which appears to be just and reasonable. Hence, there are no merits in this Appeal. The Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. The claimant- respondent is entitled to the statutory benefits as per the amended provisions of the Act. No order as to costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J __________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Date: 31-01-2011 YCR