IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD L.A.A.S.No.149 OF 2007 AND CROSS OBJECTIONS (SR)NO.4404 OF 2007 Date:21-02-2011 L.A.A.S.No.149 OF 2007:- Between:- The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.O.), S.R.B.C., Nandyal. .. Appellant/Referring Officer And Kamsali Rama Achari .. Respondent/Claimant And Cross Objections (SR)No.4404 of 2007:- Between:- Kamsali Rama Achari .. Cross Objector/Respondent/Claimant And The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.O.), S.R.B.C., Nandyal. .. Respondent/Appellant/Referring Officer COMMON JUDGMENT:- (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) This appeal is at the instance of the State represented by the Land Acquisition Officer filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) questioning the correctness of the Award of the Reference Court below in O.P.No.7 of 2000 dated 29-07-2005 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur and proceedings arise under Section 18 of the Act. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the lands in question to an extent of Ac.0.63 cents in total were acquired for the purpose of formation of the approaches to ‘Gajjalavagu’ of S.R.B.C. By issuance of a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 31-05-1995 and after holding of enquiry, the Award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer fixing the market value at Rs.50,000/- per acre. Not satisfied with the said quantum, the claimant sought reference. 3. The Court below, during the course of enquiry, examined the claimant as P.W.1 apart from P.W.2 and marked Exs.A-1 and A-2, whereas on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer, R.W.1 was examined. The Award dated 07-10-1999 was marked as Ex.B-1. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court below enhanced the market value to Rs.2,000/- per cent. Hence, the appeal by the State. 5. In this appeal, the respondent/claimant also filed cross objections (SR) No.4404 of 2007 seeking further enhancement. 6. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the Land Acquisition Officer submits that having regard to the evidence as available on record, the enhancement made by the Court below is totally erroneous, whereas the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/claimant, who filed the cross objections, sought for further enhancement of compensation on the ground that in respect of the land of the same village, though notification was issued subsequently on 30-05-1996, this Court, vide common judgment in L.A.A.S.Nos.70 and 1015 of 2007, dated 19-12-2008, allowed the claim of the claimants therein and enhanced the market rate to Rs.4,800/- per cent and in view of the same, by giving due deduction, notification being one year later, the market rate can be fixed accordingly. 7. There being no dispute that in respect of acquisition of the land of the same village by way of a subsequent notification issued one year later, this Court fixed the market rate at Rs.4,800/- per cent, it can be safe instead of considering again the evidence of sale transactions or otherwise, we are of the opinion that by giving the necessary deduction of one year, the market rate can safely be fixed at Rs.4,600/- per cent in respect of lands in question. Accordingly, we hold that the claimant is entitled to compensation at the market rate of Rs.4,600/- per cent for the acquired land along with all the other statutory benefits as per the amended provisions of the Act. 8. In view of the above said finding, the appeal filed by the State in L.A.A.S.No.149 of 2007 is dismissed whereas Cross Objections (SR) No.4404 of 2007 filed by the claimant is allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J ______________________ P.DURGA PRASAD, J 21st February, 2011 AMD