HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NO.1919 OF 2000 & Cross-Objec.(SR) No.67954 of 2000 Dt.18.8.2010 A.S.NO.1919 OF 2000 Between: Kamshetty ..Appellant And Government of A.P., through M.R.O., Manoor Mandal, Medak District. ..Respondent Cross-Objec.(SR) No.67954 of 2000 Government of Andhra Pradesh through M.R.O., Manoor Mandal, Medak District. ..Cross- objector And Kamshetty ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NO.1919 OF 2000 & Cross-Objec.(SR) No.67954 of 2000 JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) Appellant herein is the claimant in O.P.No.307 of 1985 on the file of the District Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. The respondent is the Land Acquisition Officer, who filed cross- objections. The land of the petitioner-claimant to an extent of Ac.2.12 gts in Sy.No.74 situate at Damarigidda Village, Manoor Mandal, Medak District, was acquired for the purpose of house sites pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, the Act) published in the gazette notification on 27.7.1981 and award was passed on 3.9.1983 and possession was taken on 26.2.1983. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.1800/- per acre on the basis of certain sale transactions in Sy.No.71 situate at a distance of half a furlong from the acquired land. The appellant claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.10/- per sq.yard. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the Reference Court by the impugned order dated 17.11.1999 enhanced the compensation to Rs.3600/- per acre. Aggrieved by the same, the claimant filed this appeal. It is the case of the claimant that in respect of abutting lands there was sale transaction under Ex.A-1 sale deed document No.576/1979, dated 3.7.1979, by which an extent of 156 sq.yards were sold at the rate of Rs.2/- per sq.yard and along with hut it was purchased for a total sum of Rs.1200/-. The question that arises for consideration is whether the claimant is entitled for any further enhancement of compensation. The claimant himself was examined as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A-1 and A-2. P.W.2 is examined to prove Ex.A-1 sale deed, who is a resident of the same village. P.W.3 is examined to speak about Ex.A-2 award pertaining to the acquisition of land in the adjacent village situate at 1 K.M. away and compensation was paid at the rate of Rs.8/- per sq.yard. Ex.A-1 is a sale deed in respect of Plot No.1-6 admeasuring 156 sq.yards along with hut, which was purchased for a sum of Rs.1200/-. As per the deposition of P.W.2, the land covered by Ex.A-1 sale deed is adjacent to the acquired land. Even R.W.1 – Mandal Revenue Officer in his deposition admitted that Ex.A-1 sale transaction is a house plot and it was not taken into consideration while passing the award and he know the vendee of Ex.A-1 sale deed, namely, Bhadrappa and it is a constructed house by the side of the road and the said house is by the side of the acquired land. There is no dispute that the land covered by Ex.A-1 and the land acquired is abutting with each other. If that be so, the land purchased under Ex.A-1 sale deed is at the rate of Rs.2/- per sq.yard, but along with hut it was purchased at Rs.1200/-. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to compensation at Rs.2/- per sq.yard which comes to Rs.9680/- per acre. We are of the opinion that the Land Acquisition Officer ought to have taken into consideration the said sale transaction being only relevant and available sale transaction prior to acquisition. In that view of the matter, we do not see any merit in the cross-objections and the same is accordingly dismissed. The appeal filed by the appellant is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.3600/- to Rs.9680/- per acre. The claimant is entitled for all other statutory benefits on the enhanced compensation amount. No order as to costs. _______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. _______________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 18.8.2010 kpr