THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO A.S.No.141 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) This appeal, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nandyal, is directed against the order dated 18.12.2000 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal, in O.P.No.93 of 1990 wherein the learned Judge enhanced the market value of the land situated in Kolimigundla village to Rs.300/- per cent and the building value to Rs.55,000/-. An extent of 1 ¼ cents of house site in Sy.No.365/3 situated in Kolimigundla village along with the building standing thereon was acquired for formation of approach road to bridge in KM 36/2 of Banaganapalle to Kolimigundla. Draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was published in the A.P. Gazette on 20.11.1985 and the possession of the same was taken on 29.07.1988. The Land Acquisition Officer passed Award No.4 of 1988 dated 19.07.1988 fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.200/- per cent and for the structure at Rs.40,454/-. Dissatisfied with the fixation of market value, the claimant received the amount under protest and sought for reference to the civil Court under Section 18 of the Act for due determination of market value. On reference being made, the same was numbered as O.P.No.93 of 1990. The claimant, who participated in the enquiry, examined himself as RW.1, but he did not file any documents on his behalf. On behalf of the referring officer except marking Ex.A.1-award copy, no oral evidence has been let in. Since no other document was available, the Land Acquisition Officer himself fixed the compensation for the structures at Rs.40,454/-. Considering the oral evidence adduced by the claimant, the lower Court observed that the acquired land is situated 20 yards away from the Kolimigundla bus stand, which is situated on the main road. The Lower Court also observed that the evidence adduced by the claimant discloses that he was running a sundry shop in the building and there were no sales, and he claimed compensation at Rs.1,50,000/- for the building. But he failed to substantiate the plea that he was running a sundry shop or the prevailing market value of the building at the relevant time was Rs.1,50,000/-. Since the site is situated on the main road, which was classified as village site poramboke, and due to the compulsory nature of acquisition the claimant lost his residential house and became shelter less, the lower Court hypothetically fixed the market value of the land at Rs.300/- per cent as against Rs.200/- i.e., 50% more as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, and the value of the structure at Rs.55,000/- as against Rs.40,454/- We do not see any illegality in the order passed by the lower Court in exercise of discretion for enhancement of compensation, which is only 50% over and above the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Government has issued various G.Os instructing the Land Acquisition Officers not to file any appeal against enhancement of compensation up to 100%, and if there are any matters after issuing the G.O. they shall be settled before the Lok Adalath. Therefore, we do not see any merit in the appeal. Accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ (A.GOPAL REDDY, J.) _______________ (RAJA ELANGO, J.) 1st June, 2010 Js.