THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.S.APPA RAO A.S.No.2247 of 1999 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K.S.Appa Rao) Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree, dated 16- 06-1998, passed in O.P.No.19 of 1993 by the Senior Civil Judge, Bodhan, the present appeal is filed by the Government. The lands of the respondents/claimants to an extent of Ac.7-02 gts., situated at Medpally village and Ac.2-38 gts., situated at Laxmapur village, were acquired for the purpose of constructing a dam line and quarries of Laxmisagar Project. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published on 29-09-1992 and the Land Acquisition Officer, after due enquiry, awarded compensation @ Rs.2,012/- per acre for Ac.7-08 gts., and Rs.4,900/- per acre for Ac.2-30 gts. Dissatisfied with the said compensation, on the request made by the claimants, the reference was made. The Reference Court, after due enquiry, enhanced compensation to Rs.15,000/- per acre for both the lands. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the Government. The learned Government Pleader argued that the Reference Court without any documentary evidence enhanced the compensation from Rs.2,012/- and Rs.4,900/- to Rs.15,000/- and the said compensation needs to be reduced. Now the point for consideration is whether the enhancement of compensation awarded by the Reference Court is just and reasonable and that the order of the Reference Court is sustainable? Before the court below, on behalf of the claimants, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and Exs.A.1 to A.15 were marked. On behalf of the appellant, RW.1 was examined and Ex.B-1 was marked. We have perused the material available on record. The claimants mainly relied on Ex.A-15-registered sale deed, dated 08-10-1991, wherein the land to an extent of Ac.0-05 gts., in Sy.No.55/E situated at Medpally village outskirts, was sold @ Rs.500/- per gunta and PW.3 is an attestor of Ex.A-15. According to him, the land covered under Ex.A-15 was sold @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. Admittedly, Ex.A-15 is a registered document prior to 4(1) Notification. No rebuttal evidence was adduced by the Referring Officer to challenge the authenticity of Ex.A-15. In the absence of any rebuttal evidence, the documentary evidence Ex.A-15 coupled with the evidence of PW.3 remained unchallenged. Therefore, we can safely place reliance on Ex.A-15 document and contents thereunder. Admittedly, the property covered under Ex.A-15 was sold @ Rs.20,000/- per acre. Therefore, viewed from any angle and having regard to the totality of the circumstances, the finding of the Reference Court determining the market value of the land acquired at Rs.15,000/- per acre appears to be just and reasonable and we do not see any grounds to differ with the findings of the Reference Court. It is argued by the learned Government Pleader that the Reference court awarded interest from 04-12-1987, the date on which possession was taken, i.e., prior to 4(1) Notification instead of awarding from the date of 4(1) Notification. Therefore, he requests to grant interest from the date of 4(1) Notification. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the interest @ 9% per annum is awarded from the date of 4(1) Notification instead of 04- 12-1987, as ordered by the Reference Court. The order of the Reference Court is modified to the extent of awarding interest only and confirmed in all other aspects. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ________________ K.S.APPA RAO, J Date: 02-12-2011 Prv