THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO A.S.No.2039 of 20001 Date of Judgment: 02-06-2010 Between: The Special Deputy Collector (LA) S.S.P., Atmakur. ..Appellant and P.C.Hussainaiah ..Respondent The Court made the following Judgment: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO A.S.No.2039 of 20001 Oral Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) The Special Deputy Collector (LA) S.S.P., Atmakur filed this appeal challenging the order and decree of the Senior Civil Judge, Nandikotkur in O.P.No.3519 of 1991 dated 09-12-1999, whereby the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1898 (for short “the Act”) was answered in favour of the claimant enhancing the compensation for the acquired land at Rs.3,000/- per cent i.e. Rs.3,00,000/- per acre as against Rs.2,500/- per acre awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO). On the requisition made by the Executive Engineer, Dam Division No.1, Srisailam Project, for acquisition of land in Ganapuram Village, Pagidyala Mandal for formation of Srisailam Hydro Electric Project, an extent of Ac.0.17 cts. of land belonging to the respondent/claimant was acquired by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Act and the same was published in the A.P.Gazette on 22-01-1976. The LAO after complying due formalities passed an award fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.2,500/- per acre by Award No.30 /79, Ex.A1. The claimant on receipt of compensation under protest filed an application under Section 18 of the Act for referring the matter to the civil court seeking enhancement. On reference being made the claimant appeared and filed necessary claim statement. On behalf of the Referring Officer, P.W.1 was examined and Ex.A1—award copy was marked. The claimant himself was examined as R.W.1 and Exs.X1 to X4 were marked. The claimant in his evidence stated that his land to an extent of Ac.0.17 cts. was acquired and LAO awarded only Rs.25/- per cent i.e. Rs.2,500/- per acre, whereas under Ex.X1—sale deed, the land was sold at Rs.3,000/- per cent, which comes to Rs.3,00,000/- per acre. He further stated that in the same village when the lands were acquired for the same purpose, the matter was referred in O.P.No.146 of 1981 wherein the reference court relying on the very same sale transaction marked as Ex.B2 (Ex.X1 in the present case) fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3,000/- per cent, which has been confirmed by the High Court in A.S.No.2650 of 1987, dated 09-12-1988. The reference court after considering the above evidence and the previous award passed by it in O.P.No.146 of 1981 held that the award covered under the present case and the award covered for the lands in O.P.No.146 of 1981 are 1979 and 1980 almost of the same time and of the same village. The land covered in O.P.No.146 of 1981 is in Sy.No.341/B, whereas the land covered by present acquisition is in Sy.No.569/3B; therefore, the claimants are entitled to the same compensation and accordingly fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3,000/- per cent. Further, additional market value was awarded from the date of taking possession till the date of award apart from all statutory benefits. We have heard the learned Government Pleader for Appeals and the learned counsel for the respondent/claimant. At the outset, we can say the market value has to be determined as on the date of issuance of notification but not on the date of passing of the award. Under Ex.X2, Ac.0.02 cts. of land was acquired through the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act dated 15-10-1979, whereas the present notification was published on 22-01- 1976 i.e. 3 years 9 months prior to notification issued in O.P.No.146 of 1981. Except marking the document, Ex.X2—certified copy of the judgment and decree in O.P.No.146 of 1981, no evidence was let in to establish that the lands covered in O.P.No.146 of 1981 and the lands covered under present notification are adjacent to each other; for the reason, the reference court in O.P.No.146 of 1981 observed that the lands covered under Ex.B2—sale deed are in Sy.No.340, whereas the lands acquired are in Sy.No.341/B, which are adjacent to each other. So, the value fetched for the house site covered by sale deed—Ex.B2, which is marked as Ex.X1, can be safely taken as comparable sale for fixation of the market value. In the absence of the same, the lower court erred in accepting the said sale transaction as comparable sale for fixation of the market value as was done by the reference court in O.P.No.146 of 1981 that the awards in both the cases are almost at the same time and the lands acquired are of the same village. The LAO admitted that property acquired in the present O.P. is house site land. Therefore, the same can be taken as basis for fixation of the market value with necessary escalation. If 10% escalation is added to the land, since there is 18 years, reference court enhanced three times of the market value put up in Ex.X1. If same analogy is adopted, the claimants are entitled to 2½ times more than the value shown in Ex.X1, i.e. 2,500/- per cent. We accordingly fix the market value of the acquired land at Rs.2,500/- per cent. Further, the award itself was passed on 23-02-1979 i.e. prior to coming into force of the amended provisions as per Amendment Act 68/1984. Therefore, the claimants are not entitled to additional market value on the enhanced compensation under Section 21 of the Act, except 30% solatium on the enhanced compensation and interest at the rate of 9% per annum for a period of one year from the date of taking possession i.e. 29-05-1979 and thereafter at 15% per annum, The appeal is partly allowed to the extent indicated above. No costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. ______________ RAJA ELANGO,J. 02-06-2010 Murthy