THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.1143 OF 2002 Dated. 01-12-2010 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer Warangal …Appellant Vs. Md.Hussain and another ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.1143 OF 2002 JUDGMENT (Per NRLN,J) This appeal is filed against the judgment in LAOP No.15 of 1997 on the file of the court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad whereas against the market value of Rs.10,000/- per acre awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, enhanced the same to the value of Rs.36,000/- per acre. The extent of property involved in this appeal is 8 ½ guntas and the value of the appeal due to enhancement is Rs.5,525/-. The facts of the case are as under:- An extent of 8 ½ guntas of land in Sy.Nos.71, 75 and 17 guntas of land in Sy.No.70 of the claimants were acquired for excavation of DBM 38 Channel under the limits of Ramatheertham village. Draft notification was published on 02- 05-1991 and after conducting an award enquiry, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at Rs.10,000/- per acre and as the claimants were not satisfied, the matter was referred to the civil court. The claimants maintained before the civil court that the value fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer is very low and the value as on the date of notification is merely Rs.40,000/- to Rs.50,000/- and consequently pleaded for enhancement. On behalf of the claimants, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and marked Ex.X-1. On behalf of the referring officer, RW.1 was examined and marked Exs.B-1 and B-2. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Senior Civil Judge passed the award, which is under appeal. The points that arise for consideration are:- (1) Whether the enhancement granted by the learned Senior Civil Judge is legal and sustainable? (2) To what relief? POINTS:- The learned Senior Civil Judge found that the sale transactions three years prior to the draft notification were not considered by the Land Acquisition Officer and he has fixed the market value at lesser price. It was also noticed from the evidence of PWs.1 to 3 by the learned Senior Civil Judge that the extent of land referred by the Land Acquisition Officer is not correct. The learned Senior Civil Judge took into consideration the valuation of the market value under Ex.X-1 by 29-11-1983 per acre and by giving escalation of 10% and fixed the market value at Rs.36,000/-. The evidence of PWS.1 to 3 is therefore supported by Ex.X-1 which is long prior to the notification and the learned Senior Civil Judge has rightly relied upon and therefore, there are no grounds to interfere with the order of the lower court. Therefore, the appeal suit is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the points are answered. Therefore, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J _______________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J 01-12-2010 TSNR