THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD A.S.NO.2349 OF 2001 JUDGMENT: {Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao} This appeal is at the instance of the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 {“the Act” for brevity}, inter alia, seeking to assail the correctness of the award of the Court below in determining the market value at Rs.30,000/- per acre, as per the judgment and decree dated 30.01.2001 O.P.No.38 of 1997 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad, against the proceedings arising under Section 18 of the Act. The facts, which gave rise to the present appeal, are that in pursuance of the notification purported to have been issued on 30.06.1983 under Section 4 (1) of the Act, an extent of Acs.2.15 gts situated in Manyathanda Village, H/O.Mahabubabad, was acquired for the purpose of providing house sites to the Scheduled Castes. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award dated 14.06.1983 fixing the market value at Rs.3,500/- per acre. Not satisfied thereby, the claimant sought reference. In the Court below, during the course of enquiry, the respondent-claimant himself examined as P.W.1 and got examined P.W.2, the vendor under Ex.X1 and got marked the said sale transaction as Ex.X1. On behalf of the appellant-State, D.W.1 was examined and Exs.B1 and B2, which are award proceedings, were marked. Except the award proceedings, no sale transactions have been produced by the appellant herein. By placing reliance on Ex.X1, the sale transaction at Rs.25/- per square yard and the date of sale being 01.09.1982, which is much prior to the date of issuance of notification in this case; the Court below enhanced the value and fixed the market rate at Rs.30,000/- per acre. Having heard on either side and on perusal of the material available on record, the ultimate question is as to the correctness of the market rate fixed by the Court below. It is to be seen that no material has been produced on behalf of the State-appellant in rebuttal. The only document, on which reliance was placed, is on Ex.X1 and no explanation has been coming forth in the memorandum of grounds and also to why the said document should not be accepted or liable to be rejected. Admittedly, the land under Ex.X1 is of the same village and the transaction is much prior to the date of notification in this case and the enhancement made by the Court below is just and reasonable. We do not find any reason to interfere with the same. Hence, there are no merits in the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) __________________ (P.DURGA PRASAD, J) 7th February 2011 RRB