JUDGMENT : The Cross-Objectors dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded for the land bearing Sy. No. 171/2 measuring 7 acres 23 guntas of Gadilingadahalli Village, Taluk Chincholi acquired by the respondent, has perfected this cross-objection seeking enhancement. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of the cross-objections are as under; The land of cross-objectors was acquired by the respondent vide notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 18-3-1993. The Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated 3-5-1996 fixed the market value of the acquired lands at rate of 10,000/- per acre. The cross-objector submitted his application under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and on reference of the matter, the other cases were clubbed and one of the claimant was examined as P.W. 1 and the Exs. P. 1 to P. 8 documents are marked. The Reference Court on appreciating the materials on record enhanced the compensation from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 33,000/- per acre for dry lands and aggrieved by the compensation, the Special Land Acquisition Officer filed the appeal and the cross-objectors have filed the cross-objections seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the cross-objector and also the Government Pleader. 4. The point that arise for my consideration is; “Whether the cross-objectors are entitled to the enhancement in the market value of the land acquired if so to what extent?” 5. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the cross-objector that in M.F.A. No. 7429 of 2007 of this Court, dated 4th June, 2009 has enhanced the compensation to Rs. 65,000/- in respect of dry lands and the Counsel for cross-objectors submit that the land of the Cross-Objectors was situated in the neighbouring village (at Gadilingadalli Village) and same type of crops were grown and he claims that he is entitled to compensation as per the judgment of this Court referred above. Furthermore he submits that, the notification in the judgment referred above was dated 30-5-1991 and in the present case the Notification under Section 4(1) was dated 18-9-1993. So he claims that the cross-objectors entitled to escalation price at 10% per year. On these grounds he sought for enhancement of compensation. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has supported the judgment and award of the Reference Court. 7. So he claims that the cross-objectors entitled to escalation price at 10% per year. On these grounds he sought for enhancement of compensation. 6. Per contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader has supported the judgment and award of the Reference Court. 7. I have carefully scrutinised the judgment of the Court below and also judgment referred by the cross-objector. It is not dispute that the Village Chennur and Gadi Lingadalli are the neighbouring Villages of same taluka. It is also not dispute that same crops were grown in the dry lands acquired. This Court after taken into consideration the material placed on record and also the fact that the jawar and toor crops were grown, enhanced the compensation of Rs. 65,000/-per acre in respect of dry lands. So to maintain the party in the price of the acquired lands, it is necessary to enhance the compensation as decided by this Court in the above referred MFA. 8. Apart from this, as the notification in respect of lands acquired is of the year 1993 and in the referred case the notification was of the year 1991, the Cross-Objector is entitled to escalation price at 10% per year. In the circumstances the cross-objectors are entitled to Rs. 65,000/- + Rs. 13,000/- = Rs. 78,000/-per acre. In the circumstances, the cross-objectors are entitled to the enhanced market value as stated above. Hence, I answer the point in the affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The Cross-Objections are allowed in part. The cross-objectors are entitled to the market value at Rs. 78,000/- per acre in respect of land bearing Sy. No. 170/2 measuring 7 acres 23 guntas of Gadilingadalli Village with all other statutory benefits and costs. The cross-objections accordingly disposed of. Two weeks time is granted to cross-objectors to pay the deficit Court fee.