HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.414 of 2000 Dated: 23-04-2010 Between: The Special Deputy Collector (L.A.), H.L.C., Anantapur. Appellant AND Smt. B.Arundhathi. Respondent. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY A.S.No.414 of 2000 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This appeal by the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) is directed against the orders of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ananthapur, dated 15.09.1999 made in O.P.No.26 of 1991 whereby the compensation for the acquired land was enhanced from Rs.5,016/- to Rs.15,000/- per acre. An extent of Ac.6.50 cents of land belonged to the claimant- respondent herein along with other land situated in Mylarampalli Village was acquired by Government for the purpose of foreshore submersion of PABR Dam by publishing draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Act on 20.6.1979. The Land Acquisition Officer after conducting enquiry, passed different awards fixing the market value of the acquired land at Rs.5,016/- per acre. The claimant having not satisfied with the fixation of the market value, sought for reference to the Civil Court for due determination of the market value. On reference being made, the claimant appeared and filed claim statement before the reference Court claiming compensation at Rs.35,000/- per acre contending that the acquired lands were double crop wet lands and situated abutting the banks of Pennar river with mixed soil, and that she used to raise two paddy crops per annum and was getting 40 bags of paddy per acre for each crop and that she was getting net income about Rs.13,000/- per acre for two crops after deducting agricultural expenses. To prove the market value, the claimant herself examined as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A.1 and A.2. On behalf of the referring officer, no oral evidence was adduced, but Exs.B.1 to B.8 were marked. On consideration of the evidence available on record, the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.15,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the Land Acquisition Officer. The claimant in her evidence as P.W.1, while reiterating the averments in the claim statement, stated that the Government acquired some other adjacent lands belonged to her earlier to the present acquisition, in which, on reference being made in O.P.No.39 of 1988, the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.15,000/- per acre, as seen from Ex.A.1 and A.2. Therefore, according to her, after giving due escalation for the time log, she is entitled to the market value at Rs.35,000/- per acre for the acquired lands. The evidence on record also discloses that for earlier acquisition of the land to an extent of Ac.1.62 cents in Sy.No.191-B classified as wet land irrigated with the help of pinakini river, the reference Court fixed the market value at Rs.15,000/- per acre in O.P.No.39 of 1988, and that the acquired lands are adjacent to the said lands. Further, the lands in Sy.Nos.194 and 189 are classified as wet lands irrigated with the help of Penakini Pedda Calva and all the lands are wet lands and they are located in Pennar river bed below Anantapur-Rayadurg cause-way, but later, the lands were treated as dry lands. Since the acquired lands are adjacent to the lands covered by Ex.A.1 and are similar in fertility, the fixation of the market value by the reference Court at Rs.15,000/- per acre, basing on Ex.A.1, is just and reasonable compensation. We see no merit in the appeal. In the result, the appeal is dismissed confirming the enhancement of compensation made by the reference Court at Rs.15,000/- per acre. No order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ APRIL 23, 2010 G.V. SEETHAPATHY, J. Tsr.