HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISITION PETITION No. 1152 OF 2006. DATED 26TH AUGUST, 2010. BETWEEN APSRTC, rep. By its Managing Director Musheerabad, Hyderabad. …Petitioner and Medi Bhoomanna and anr ….Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO CIVIL REVISITION PETITION No. 1152 OF 2006 ORDER: The petitioner-APSRTC is a beneﬁciary in the acquisition proceedings initiated by the second respondent. The second respondent herein acquired the land of the ﬁrst respondent to an extent of Ac.4.27 gts. in Sy.No. 441 and 442 of Utnoor in Adilabad District for the purpose of construction of bus station by initiating the proceedings under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. By an award dated 29.12.1989 the Land Acquisition Oﬃcer ﬁxed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.9600/- per acre. Ultimately, the Reference Court enhanced the market value to Rs.28,000/- per acre. There is no dispute with regard to the ﬁxation of the market value ﬁxed by the Court below on reference including by this Court in the appeal against such reference order. Thereafter, the ﬁrst respondent/claimant has ﬁled execution proceedings in E.P. No. 37 of 2004 along with calculation memo showing the amounts in due under various heads and also showing the amounts already received. The petitioner has not ﬁled any calculation memo disputing the amounts shown by the ﬁrst respondent/claimant. As there is no dispute with regard to the calculation memo ﬁled by the ﬁrst respondent/claimant, the Court below ordered for depositing of the decreetal amount in the Execution Proceedings. In this revision, the learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner-Corporation submitted that they have prepared calculation memo now and as per which, the balance amount payable is only Rs.55,304/-. However, on a reading of the grounds of the revision and other material available on record, neither any further material to show the calculations as to how they arrived at the balance amount payable to the ﬁrst respondent/claimant at this stage in this Civil Revision Petition is ﬁled nor any material to show how the calculation made by the claimant/ﬁrst respondent in the memo ﬁled by him before the Court below is either erroneous or not entitled to the excess amount than the balance amount calculated by them is ﬁled. In the absence of any such documentary evidence, in this case it is not open to seek any explanation from the ﬁrst respondent/claimant to look into or an opportunity to clarify the calculation memo ﬁled by him. It is also not the case of the petitioner that no such proper opportunity is provided to him. In that view of the matter, I do not see any merit in the revision. The Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ----------------------------------------- JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 26T H AUGUST, 2010. Msnr.