HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY LAAS.Nos.291, 308 and 334 of 2006 COMMON JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) These are appeals by the State directed against the common order of the Reference Court of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal in O.P.Nos.87, 86 and 85 of 1994, dated 31.12.2005, respectively. On a requisition by the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board, Hyderabad for acquisition of Ac.100.00 land in Moolasagaram Village, Nandyal Mandal, Kurnool District for a housing scheme, the State initiated proceedings under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’). After due process of issuance of a draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, the process of acquisition was pursued and eventually the Land Acquisition Officer passed an award determining the market value of the land at Rs.16,000/- per acre. The respondents herein, who are the claimants, feeling aggrieved by the quantum of compensation q u a the market value as determined by the Land Acquisition Officer sought references under Section 18 of the Act. The references were made and numbered as O.P.Nos.85, 86 and 87 of 1994. The learned Reference Court, by the common order impugned in these appeals, enhanced the market value from Rs.16,000/- per acre as fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer to Rs.40,000/- per acre. The extents of land involved in these three appeals are small extents Ac.0.23 cents, Ac.0.22 cents and Ac.0.22 cents respectively. Before the learned Reference Court, the three O.Ps. arising out of the same award and the same notification for acquisition were clubbed for adjudication and evidence was recorded in common. The learned Reference Court relied on Exs.B.1 and B.2, certified copies of the judgments of the Reference Court in O.Ps. pertaining to neighbouring lands forming part of the similar tranche of acquisition also for the housing board, wherein the market value determined at Rs.40,000/- per acre was confirmed by this Court as well as the Supreme Court. The learned Reference Court recorded that the Land Acquisition Officer, in his cross-examination, as PW.1 admitted the fact that qua, Ex.B.2, the learned Reference Court for similar acquisition had determined the market value at Rs.40,000/- per acre which was also confirmed by this Court in State’s appeal and eventually by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the learned Reference Court determined the compensation on par with similar beneficiaries of the lands, at Rs.40,000/- per acre. In totality of the circumstances, we find no reason for appellate interference. There is no error either in the application of law, the exercise of discretion or analysis of the evidence by the learned Reference Court warranting interference in these appeals. These appeals are accordingly dismissed but in the circumstances without costs. GODA RAGHURAM,J G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J Date:27.12.2010 usd