JUDGMENT : 1. The appellant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the market value of the acquired land as against sum granted by the Reference Court through its judgment and award dated 23.05.2005 in LAC No. 47/2004. 2. The land bearing Survey No. 58/B measuring 6 acres 14 guntas situated at Chennur Village, Tq: Chincholi, District Gulbarga was acquired for the purpose of “Lower Mullamari Project” through preliminary Notification dated 30.05.1991 and the award was passed on 04.05.1993 by determining the market value at Rs.8,000/- per acre for dry land and Rs.10,000/- per acre for wet land. The appellant-landowner claiming to be aggrieved filed a protest petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act seeking enhancement of the market value. The same came to be referred to the Reference Court and was registered in LAC No. 47/2004. Through the judgment and award dated 23.05.2005, after taking into consideration the evidence tendered before it, the Reference Court has fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.70,000/- per acre with statutory benefits. The appellant is seeking enhancement of the said compensation. 3. Though several contentions have been urged, the learned counsel for the appellant would rely on the judgment of this Court in MFA No. 30169/2008 dated 05.04.2014 to point out that in respect of the similar acquisition for the same Project but under a different notification, this Court has assessed at Rs.1,72,630/- per acre for wet land. 4. At this stage, it is necessary to note that the learned Single Judge in MFA No. 30169/2008 dated 05.04.2014 by taking into consideration the location of land and in respect of the land situated in Chincholli Taluk being at a distance from head quarters has awarded the said amount. Since, in the cited case the market value was considered at Rs.1,72,630/- per acre for wet land as being 2/3 of the value of dry land as assessed at Rs.1,15,086/- per acre with all statutory benefits. If the same is awarded the said amount will be considered to be a just compensation as per the market value ignoring the several contentions raised in the appeal. 5. Though the learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the interest be awarded from the date of possession, but in the judgment in MFA No. 30169/2008 it has been awarded from the date of notification which is considered to be just and proper. 6. 5. Though the learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the interest be awarded from the date of possession, but in the judgment in MFA No. 30169/2008 it has been awarded from the date of notification which is considered to be just and proper. 6. Since the delay in filing the appeal was condoned by this Court subject to denial of the interest for the said period the respondent may take note of the same and deduct the interest for the delayed period while paying the compensation. 7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.