THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR A.S.Nos.26 and 35 of 2002 Date: 28.12.2010 A.S.No.26 of 2002 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Deputy Collector, YRP, Unit-III, Peddapuram. .. Appellant/ Referring Officer AND Neeli Mallayya, s/o. Latchanna, Age: 36 years, Hindu, cultivation, Neelipakau, H/o. J. Annavaram, Yeleswaram Mandal, E.G. Dist. .. Respondent/ Claimant A.S.No.35 of 2002 Between: The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Deputy Collector, YRP, Unit-III, Peddapuram. .. Appellant/ Referring Officer AND Neeli Surya Rao, s/o. Latchanna, Age: 40 years, Hindu, Occ: Cultivation, Neelipakau, H/o. J. Annavaram, Yeleswaram Mandal, E.G. Dist. .. Respondent/ Claimant THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G. SHANKAR A.S.Nos.26 and 35 of 2002 COMMON JUDGMENT (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.G. Shankar): The Land Acquisition Officer and Special Deputy Collector, Yeluru Reservoir Project, Unit-III, Peddapuram.appellant herein, acquired Ac.86.41 cents of land in various survey numbers in J. Annavaram village in connection with the Yeleru Reservoir Project. Out of the total extent acquired, Ac.1.00 cents in Survey No.722/1 and Ac.1.20 cents in the same survey number belonged to the claimants in O.P.Nos.110 of 1996 and 111 of 1996 before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram respectively. As the amount of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer was not agreeable to the claimants, the claimants got the awards referred to the reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for reference. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram, through common order dated 04.09.2000 in LAOP Nos.110, 111 and 112 of 1996, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs.40,000/- per acre for dry lands. Aggrieved by the same, the Land Acquisition Officer laid the present appeals questioning the orders in LAOP Nos.110 of 1996 and 111 of 1996. 2. Sri S. Md. Haneef, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for the appellant/State and Sri V. Manohar Rao, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants, advanced their submissions in respect of the claims. While the learned counsel for the claimants supported the awards, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Appeals contended that the value as determined by the reference Court is not just and proper. 3. The lands in J. Annavaram and surrounding villages were acquired for Yeleru Reservoir Project. Several claims arose relating to the determination of the market value of the acquired property. Ex.A.2 is the certified copy of the judgment in A.S.Nos.2913 of 1996 passed by a Division Bench of this Court, in one such matter. The certified copy of the judgment in A.S.No.2733 of 1996 on the file of this Court is Ex.A.4. Through the judgments in Exs.A.2 and A.4, the Division Bench of this Court determined the market value of the acquired properties of J. Annavaram and surrounding villages at Rs.40,000/-per acre for dry lands. Relying upon the decisions of this Court, the reference Court determined the market value of the acquired properties at Rs.40,000/- per acre for the dry lands. 4. Where the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pithapuram placed reliance upon the decisions of this Court and determined, the market value of the acquired properties, the market value as determined by the reference Court deserves to be confirmed. There is no evidence to take a contrary view. The lands in J. Annavaram and lands in surrounding villages are similarly situate in all respects. All of them were acquired for Yeleru Reservoir Project. Therefore, the market value of all these lands in various villages deserves to be determined at the same rates. The determination of value of the properties of the claimants herein at Rs.40,000/- per acre as they are dry lands by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pitapuram, therefore, is perfectly justified and does not need any interference by this Court. 5. It may be further pointed out that in view of the then existing position of law, the reference Court did not award interest over additional market value and solatium granted in favour of the claimants. The Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India[1] held that a claimant, whose properties are acquired, is entitled to interest over not only the market value but additional market value and solatium as well. Consequently, it is pointed out that the claimants herein shall be entitled to interest over the additional market value and solatium apart from the market value. On the main merits of the appeals, where the market value was determined at Rs.40,000/- per acre for the dry lands by the reference Court on the strength of earlier decision of the Division Bench of this Court, the finding of the reference Court deserves to be confirmed. The findings of the Division Bench of this Court relating to the market value of the acquired property accordingly are binding. The appeals are found to be devoid of merits. 6. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed. No costs. ________________ G. Bhavani Prasad, J ________________ K.G. Shankar, J Date: 28.12.2010 Isn [1] 2001 (5) ALD 136