HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NOs.1939 AND 1977 OF 1999 DT.8.9.2010 A.S.NO.1939 OF 1999: Between: The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.O.) Unit II, T.G.P., Nandyal. ..Appellant And Kummara Ch. Linganna ..Respondent A.S.NO.1977 OF 1999: Between: The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.O.) Unit II, T.G.P., Nandyal. ..Appellant And Gajula Laxmamma ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI A.S.NOs.1939 AND 1977 OF 1999 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) These two appeals are filed against the common order dated 3.3.1999 in O.P.Nos.1223 and 1225 of 1992 respectively on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur respectively. The lands of the claimants to an extent of Ac.0.43 cents in Sy.No.847/2 and Ac.1.99 cents in Sy.No.844/2 both situate at Mothukur Village were acquired for the purpose of excavation of Santha Jutur Major Distributory of Telugu Ganga Project pursuant to draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, the Act) published on 12.10.1990 in A.P.Gazette. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award fixing the compensation at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per acre. The claimants claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per acre and sought for reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court basing on Ex.A-1 registered sale deed dated 13.4.1987, which relates to the sale transaction of Ac.0.50 cents for a sum of Rs.30,000/-, held that the land covered under Ex. A-1 and the acquired lands are of similar in nature being situated in the same vicinity and fixed the compensation at a price little lesser than the price covered under Ex.A-1 sale deed, since the said award of the Land Acquisition Officer is low when compared to the sale under Ex.A-1. Accordingly, the Reference Court has fixed the compensation at Rs.20,000/- per acre. We are of the opinion that the compensation fixed by the Reference Court is not excessive and it cannot be said that the Reference Court fixed the said amount without any basis. We do not see any merit in the appeals and the appeals are liable to be dismissed. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. _______________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 8.9.2010 kpr