THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.1160 of 1999 Date of Judgment: 15-03-2010 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer & Revenue Divisional Officer, Nirmal. ..Appellant And 1. Solanki Ramdas and others ..Respondents The Court made the following Judgment: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.1160 of 1999 Oral Judgment: (Per Honourable Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) 1. This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) is directed against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Nirmal dated 18- 01-1999 passed in O.P.No.38 of 1995 answering the reference under Section 18 of the Act by enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,000/- to Rs.8,000/- per acre. 2. An extent of Ac.23.03 gts. of land belonging to the respondents/claimants situated in Bamini village of Tandur Mandal was acquired for formation of P.W.D. road from Jawala to Sonari. Possession of the land was taken on 14-10-1977 followed by notification under Section 4(1) and declaration under Section 6 of the Act published in the A.P. Gazette on 23-02-1993 and 24-02-1993 respectively. The LAO after complying due formalities, by his Award dated 13-06-1995 fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.4,000/- per acre. Being not satisfied with the fixation of the market value the claimants sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act to the civil court, in which the claimants filed their claim statements claiming that they used to raise commercial crops like cotton and get 12 quintals per acre and net income of Rs.10,000/-; and used to get 8 to 10 quintals of Jawar and get Rs.8,000/- per acre. The compensation awarded by the LAO is meagre and do not reflect true market value. 3. To prove the market value, claimant No.1 was examined as R.W.1 and R.W.2 was examined to prove Ex.B1—sale deed marked in O.P. On behalf of the LAO none were examined but Ex.A1—award copy was marked. 4. R.W.2, who is the son of the purchaser under Ex.B1—sale deed, deposed that Ac.1.08 gts. of land was purchased by his mother in the year 1988 for Rs.20,000/- from one Gangadhar. As his mother is unable to attend the Court because of old age, he came to the Court to give evidence. The lands under reference are situated by the side of the land purchased by them and all are black soil. Under Ex.A1— award the LAO discarded the sale transactions from 1990 to 1993, where the market value ranges from Rs.9,500/- to Rs.20,000/- per acre, which took place on 06-04-1988, only on the ground that the above sale deeds are after taking possession of the property. 5. It is well settled that the market value has to be determined as on the date of issuance of notification but not on the date of taking possession or on the date of passing award by the LAO. 6. The lower Court after taking into consideration of the transaction under Ex.B1—sale deed fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.8,000/- per acre. Feeling aggrieved by the same the State filed the present appeal. 7. The claimants contend that the lower Court has not taken into consideration the market value reflected under Ex.B1, which is a true transaction. Further, we have noticed that the claimants are deprived of fruits of the income on the land from 1977 to 1993 i.e. till the date of issuance of notification. In view of the same, fixing of the market value of the acquired land at Rs.8,000/- per acre is not excessive and do not call for any interference. Further, we also noticed that the appeal has been dismissed for default against claimant No.6 for not complying the orders passed by this Court on 25-04-2006. In effect, the compensation fixed for the land of the 6th respondent has become final. 8. We do not see any merit in the appeal and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. _________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J. 15-03-2010 Murthy