JUDGMENT: C.Praveen Kumar, J. L.A.A.S.Nos.290 of 2015, 495 of 2007, 518 of 2007 and 273 of 2015, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, “the Act”), came to be filed by the claimants challenging the common order and decree, dated 28.12.2004, in O.P.Nos.633 of 1999, 635 of 1999, 518 of 1999 and 517 of 1999 respectively passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur aggrieved by the fixation of the market value at Rs.20,000/-per acre as against the prevalent rate of Rs.40,000/-per acre. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of these appeals are as under:- The Government of Andhra Pradesh acquired lands to an extent of Ac.3-30 cents in total i.e., Ac.0.94 cents in Sy.No.1885 situated in Velugodu Village in O.P.No.633 of 1999, Ac.1.06 cents in Sy.Nos.1883/2 and 1884/2 situated in Velugodu Village in O.P.No.635 of 1999, Ac.0.70 cents in Sy.No.1883/1 situated in Velugodu Village in O.P.No.518 of 1999 and Ac.0.60 cents in Sy.No.1883/1 situated in Velugodu Village in O.P.No.517 of 1999. The Government classified them as registered wet lands, registered irrigation dry lands, well aided dry lands and rained dry lands. These lands, which are situated in Velugodu Village, were acquired for the purpose of formation of Velugodu Balancing Reservoir under Telugu Ganga Project. The notifications under Section 4(1) and Declaration under Section 6 of the Act issued by the Government came to be published at pages 11 to 14 respectively of the Andhra Pradesh Gazette Part-I (Extraordinary) No.178, dated 30.3.1984. The substance of the notification under Section 4(1) necessary notice under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act were duly issued and published in the prescribed manner on 4.4.1984. Insofar as these lands are concerned, the Land Acquisition Officer, after conducting enquiry, took the possession of the lands on behalf of the Government on 15.6.1984 and Award No.29 of 1985 came to be passed under Section 11 of the Act on 5.8.1985. It is to be noted here that the lands which are the subject matter of dispute were classified as ‘registered wet lands.’ After due consideration of the lands through declaration and also after verifying various transactions that took place in and around the vicinity of the schedule lands, the L.A.O. fixed the compensation at Rs.9,000/-per acre. Objections came to be raised with regard to fixing of compensation at Rs.9,000/-per acre. Objections came to be raised with regard to fixing of compensation at Rs.9,000/-per acre. During the course of enquiry, the claimants claimed the value initially at Rs.20,000/-per acre. Basing on the material available on record, the L.A.O. fixed the compensation payable at Rs.9,000/-per acre apart from statutory benefits. Challenging the same, reference under Section 18 of the Act was sought seeking enhancement of the same by the claimants. 3. During the course of trial in the said O.Ps., the claimants were examined as P.W.1 and another witness as P.W.2. They also got marked Ex.A-1 – registered sale deed and Ex.A-2 – certified copy of the order, dated 2.2.1999, in W.P.No.20080 of 1998 of the common High Court at Hyderabad to prove that they are entitled for more than what has been awarded. 4. After considering the material available on record, the reference Court awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.20,000/-per acre apart from other benefits viz., additional market value at the rate of 12% per annum, 30% solatium on market value, interest at 9% per annum from the date of possession for a period of one year and thereafter, at 15% per annum till the date of payment on the enhanced compensation and solatium, equitable interest at the rate of 7½% per annum paid for five years on the differential market value. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded and in view of the law laid down by this Court and the Apex Court in respect of the lands which are acquired for the very same purpose, the present appeals came to be filed. 5. Relying upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in A.S.No.1068 of 2004 and batch, dated 9.2.2007, learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the appellants are entitled to more than what has been awarded. Though the claimants have sought compensation at the rate of Rs.40,000/-per acre, learned counsel for the appellants pleads that their claim is restricted to Rs.30,000/-per acre. According to him, the issue involved herein is covered by a Division Bench judgment referred to above. 6. The same is strongly opposed by the learned Government Pleader for Appeals, but however, did not dispute the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court becoming final. 7. According to him, the issue involved herein is covered by a Division Bench judgment referred to above. 6. The same is strongly opposed by the learned Government Pleader for Appeals, but however, did not dispute the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court becoming final. 7. The point that arises for consideration is: “Whether the claimants are entitled to more compensation than what has been awarded by the reference Court?” 8. POINT:- The fact that the land is categorized as registered wet land fixing the compensation at Rs.9,000/-by the L.A.O. is not disputed but a perusal of the material on record would show that the land is a wet land and is a black cotton soil. The claim of the claimants is that they used to raise crops like cotton, groundnut, paddy, chillies and getting an income of Rs.20,000/-per acre but except the oral evidence, no documentary evidence has been placed on record to substantiate the same. But at the same time, the order indicates that the Government has also collected several other extents of land for the purpose of Velugodu Balancing Reservoir and the civil Court enhanced the compensation on the value of those lands to Rs.20,000/-per acre. It has been held by the reference Court that the compensation awarded by the civil Court for dry land in Velugodu Village was at Rs.20,000/-per acre, which was confirmed by the High Court and the Supreme Court. 9. In fact, a Division Bench of this Court in A.S.No.1068 of 2004 and batch, dated 9.2.2007, dealt with the issue and observed that even in respect of rain fed lands, the L.A.O., though fixed the market value at Rs.6,500/-per acre, the same was enhanced to Rs.20,000/-per acre, which was confirmed by the High Court and also by the Supreme Court in the S.L.P. filed by the State. It would be useful to extract the relevant portion in the order of the Division Bench, which is as under: “…..In respect of those lands, the Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at Rs.6,500/-per acre. The same was enhanced by the Reference Court to Rs.20,000/-. This Court confirmed the said award and the Apex Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the State. The same was enhanced by the Reference Court to Rs.20,000/-. This Court confirmed the said award and the Apex Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the State. Therefore, from the evidence on record, it is clear that the value of the land as on the date of Section 4(1) notification in respect of the dry lands is Rs.20,000/-per acre…… …… The lands covered under Ex.A1 to A3 are the rain fed dry lands. Therefore, while taking the sale transactions covered under Exs.A1 to A3 for fixing the market value of the land, some amount has to be added to that figure in view of the fact that the lands acquired were irrigable dry lands. The learned Senior Civil Judge enhanced the compensation four times to the compensation given by the Land Acquisition Officer which was adopted by this Court and by taking note of the same he fixed the market value of the land at Rs.30,000/-per acre. Of course, there is an element of guess work, but at the same time, when there is nothing on record to show that the market value of the dry land is not less than Rs.20,000/-per acre, granting of Rs.30,000/-per acre in respect of irrigable dry lands is not found to be on higher side. Upon appreciation of evidence only, the trial Court enhanced the compensation. The reasons given by the trial Court for enhancing the market value of the land acquired are not found to be illegal…..” 10. From the above, it is very much clear that even in case of rain fed dry lands where the L.A.O. fixed the value at Rs.6,500/-per acre, the civil Court enhanced the same to Rs.20,000/-per acre, which was confirmed by the Hon’ble High Court and the Supreme Court. In the instant case, the land, which is the matter of dispute, falls under Category I, which was registered as “wet lands”. The market value fixed by the L.A.O. was Rs.9,000/-per acre which was enhanced to Rs.20,000/-by the reference Court. Therefore, the claim made by the claimants seeking enhancement cannot be brushed aside. When the market value of the land was enhanced to Rs.20,000/-in respect of rain fed dry lands whose value was fixed by the L.A.O. at Rs.6,500/-, we feel that in the instant case, the value should have been more when the value fixed by the L.A.O. is at Rs.9,000/-per acre. When the market value of the land was enhanced to Rs.20,000/-in respect of rain fed dry lands whose value was fixed by the L.A.O. at Rs.6,500/-, we feel that in the instant case, the value should have been more when the value fixed by the L.A.O. is at Rs.9,000/-per acre. A reading of the order of the Division Bench and also the order passed by the Apex Court indicates that the value was increased by three times. Hence, we feel that it is a fit case where the value of the land can be enhanced from Rs.20,000/-to Rs.30,000/-per acre while confirming all other statutory benefits awarded by the reference Court. 11. Accordingly, all the appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in these appeals shall stand closed.