ZTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.1308 OF 2002 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer, Anantapur …Appellant Vs. M.Kullayappa ..Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO A.S.NO.1308 OF 2002 JUDGMENT (Per NRLN,J) The appeal suit is filed against the order in O.P.No.134 of 1993 on the file of the court of learned Senior Civil Judge Anantapur questioning the enhancement of the market value from Rs.15,800/- to Rs.20,000/-. An extent of Ac.3.030 hectares of land situated at Peddakowkuntla Village of Uravakonda Mandal was acquired for the purpose of fore-shore submersion of PABR dam and the claimant was having 1/3rd share in the above extent. After conducting an award enquiry, the market value of the acquired land was fixed at Rs.15,800/- and the claimants contended that the market value is Rs.30,000/- per acre and apart from it they are having wells and other structures and getting good yield and as such the matter may be referred to the civil court. Accordingly the matter was referred to the civil court. On behalf of the claimant, PWs.1 to 3 were examined and marked Exs.A-1 and A-2. On behalf of the referring officer, RW.1 was examined and marked Exs.B-1 to B-3. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Senior Civil Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs.20,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the said order, the present appeal is filed. The points that arise for consideration are:- (1) Whether the enhancement granted by the lower court is legal and sustainable? (2) To what relief? POINT:- As can be seen from the order of the lower court, the evidence of Land Acquisition Officer clearly shows that the land is being cultivated as a wet land with well water but however the Land Acquisition Officer has adopted the market value taking into consideration the land as dry land. The lower court also relied on Exs.A-1 and A-2 sale transactions and relied on the evidence of PW.3 who purchased the land under Ex.A- 3. According to the learned Senior Civil Judge, when Rs.15,800/- was considered as value for dry land, a proportionate increase has to be granted if the lands are to be considered as wet lands. Merely because the claim was made less before the enquiry, it does not deprive the claim to get the real market value. Therefore, the learned Senior Civil Judge has rightly come to a conclusion that the enhancement has to be granted and the enhancement as granted is also not abnormal and unrealistic. The learned Senior Civil Judge did not interfere with the valuation fixed for the structures and pumps. There are absolutely no grounds to interfere with the order of the lower court. The lower court has also granted additional market value, solatium and interest. If any of the benefits under the provisions of the amended Land Acquisition Act,1894 ( for short "the Act") are not granted, the claimants can move before the court keeping in view the decision reported in Sunder Vs. Union of India([1]), and on an application being filed before the lower court, the same shall be considered in accordance with the above judgment. Accordingly the appeal suit is liable to be dismissed. The points are therefore answered. With the above observation, the Appeal Suit is dismissed. No order as to costs. ___________________ GODA RAGHURAM,J _______________________ N.R.L.NAGESWARA RAO,J 20 -1-2011 TSNR [1] 2001 (5) ALT 51 (SC).