JUDGMENT : (M. Ganga Rao, J.) 1. All these appeals arise out of the common order dated 06.08.2010 passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Nandyal in OP.Nos.434, 438, 437 & 433 of 2009 respectively filed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Nandyal, for the grounds raised in the memorandum of grounds of appeals. Hence all these appeals are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Appeals appearing for the appellant. Though notice is served on the respondents, none appeared. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant – Spl. Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal, has issued draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act on 04.09.1996 acquiring the land extent Ac.12.96 cents in various survey numbers [the details of the survey numbers are mentioned in the schedule of the OPs] of Eernapadu, Bandi Atmakur Mandal for the purpose of excavation of Eernapadu Major Distributory (canal) under Telugu Ganga Project and the same was published in daily newspapers viz., Janatha on 09.09.1996 and Eenadu on 12.09.1996. The draft declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in A.P Gazette on 21.09.1996. The substance of the draft notification and draft declaration was publicized in the locality on 12.09.1996 and 26.09.1996 respectively. Possession of the land was taken in advance and the same was handed over to the requisition department on 12.12.1996 but 80% of the land compensation required to be paid under the provisions of Section 174(3) of the Land Acquisition Act was not paid to the land owners. The Land Acquisition Officer [‘for short, ‘LAO’] has conducted award enquiry as per the procedure. Notices were served on the land owners. All the land owners participated in the award enquiry including the respondents-claimants. For the purpose of fixing the market value, the LAO had classified the land into two categories i.e., 1) rain fed dry land and (2) dry lands having irrigation through sources like wells, borewells. The LAO had gathered statistics from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Nandyal, about the sale transactions relating to three years prior to the draft notification. For the purpose of fixing the market value, the LAO had classified the land into two categories i.e., 1) rain fed dry land and (2) dry lands having irrigation through sources like wells, borewells. The LAO had gathered statistics from the office of the Sub-Registrar, Nandyal, about the sale transactions relating to three years prior to the draft notification. Having considered several sale transactions, finally, the LAO had taken into consideration the sale transaction in Sl.Nos.157, 174 and 178 and relied on the transaction in Sl.No.174, which is a registered sale deed (document No.3178) dated 10.7.1996, in respect of the land in Sy.No.379 wherein the market value was reflected as Rs.10,000/-per acre, for fixing market value of lands under acquisition as both the lands are similar in all aspects namely classification, fertility, maintenance, potentiality etc. After considering the time gap between the said sale transaction and the date of issue of the draft notification, the LAO has fixed the market value of the acquired lands at Rs.10,500/-in respect of category No.1 and at Rs.12,600/-per acre for the lands in category No.2 along with additional benefits as per the amended Act. The respondents-claimants having not satisfied with the value fixed by the LAO had received the compensation under protest and filed Memos requesting that their claim for enhancement of the compensation be referred to the civil Court. Accordingly, the LAO referred the matters under Section 18 of the LA Act to the civil Court. The reference Court has taken on file the references as Original Petitions. The Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Telugu Ganga Project is the referring Officer and the lands owners-claimants are respondents. Based on the pleadings, the reference Court framed the question as to ‘whether the Award No.14/2001 dated 31.12.2001 passed by the LAO does not adequately compensate the claimants for the loss of their lands in various Sy.Nos. of Eernapadu village, Bandi Atmakur Mandal that were acquired under draft notification dated 12.09.1996?’ During the trial, no oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the referring officer but Ex.A1 – copy of award No.14/2001 dated 31.12.2001 was marked. On behalf of the claimants, RWs1 to 4 were examined. of Eernapadu village, Bandi Atmakur Mandal that were acquired under draft notification dated 12.09.1996?’ During the trial, no oral evidence was adduced on behalf of the referring officer but Ex.A1 – copy of award No.14/2001 dated 31.12.2001 was marked. On behalf of the claimants, RWs1 to 4 were examined. Considering the above evidence, the reference Court passed judgment and decree fixing the market value of the rain-fed dry lands (category No.I) at Rs.32,000/-and the market value of the dry lands having irrigation sources like wells, bore wells (Category No.II) at Rs.36,000/-per acre besides 30% solatium on the market value and additional market value @ 12% from the date of section 4(1) notification of the Act till the date of award or taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. 4. Being aggrieved by the same, these appeass are filed by the LAO mainly contending that the reference Court enhanced the amount without any basis and evidence on record. The reference court has grossly erred in not considering the case of the land acquisition officer in correct perspective. The reference court also grossly erred in not appreciating the oral and documentary evidence adduced in the case and principles applicable thereto. The reference court has erred in comparing the lands acquired in the present acquisition with the lands in Ex.B5. The reference Court erred in applying the principle of escalation basing on the decision of the Supreme Court in Om Prakash v. Union of India [ 2004(10) SCC 627 ]. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Appeals vehemently submits that the order passed by the reference court is erroneous and contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court. Though the lands acquired earlier through various notifications are for the same purpose of Telugu Ganga Project the land and its fertility could not said to be similar to the lands acquired through the present notification. Therefore, enhancing the compensation as awarded in the earlier notifications by taking appreciation of the land value at 12% yearly is contrary to the judgments of the Apex Court. Reference Court misunderstood the decision of the Apex Court in Om Prakash (Supra). 6. We have carefully considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the counsel and perused the record. On behalf of the claimants, RWs1 to 4 were examined. Reference Court misunderstood the decision of the Apex Court in Om Prakash (Supra). 6. We have carefully considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the counsel and perused the record. On behalf of the claimants, RWs1 to 4 were examined. RW1 stated that the distance between Eernapadu and its hamlet Somayajulapalli is about 2 KMs. Boyarevula village is at a distance of 2 ½ KMs from Somayajulapalli. Velugodu is a business centre in which all fertilizers and pesticides are available. The lands are fertile lands. Even though the lands are dry lands, wet crops are cultivated using the well and borewell water. RW2 states that the land in Chinnadevalapuram village was acquired for the purpose of excavation of Telugu Ganga Project Canal in the year 1990 and the LAO fixed the market value of the lands acquired from him at Rs.10,000/-per acre. On reference, Court enhanced the same to Rs.18,000/-per acre which was become final. But the LAO did not prefer any appeal against the same. The lands of Chinnadevalapuram and the lands acquired from the claimants herein are adjacent to each other and they are also similar in nature, potentiality and market value. At the time of issuance of Section 4(1) notification under Ex.A,1 the market value of the land was fixed at Rs.1,00,000/-per acre. In the cross examination he stated that Chinnadevalapuram is located at a distance of 8 KMs from Velugodu and at 6 KMs from Boyarevula village. RW3 deposed that his land in Velugodu village was acquired for the purpose of formation of a reservoir as part of Telugu Ganga Project, in the year 1984 and the market value fixed by the LAO at Rs.6,500/-per acre and Rs.8,500/-per acre respectively for dry lands and irrigated dry lands was enhanced by the Court to Rs.20,000/-per acre and Rs.30,000/-per acre respectively. RW4 in his evidence stated that his land in Boyarevula village was acquired in the year 1997 for the purpose of excavation of Telugu Ganga Project canal and the market value at Rs.30,000/-per acre fixed by t he LAO was enhanced by the Court to Rs.50,000/-per acre. The lands in Boyarevula village and the lands acquired from the claimants herein are similar in nature, potentiality and market value. The distance between Boyarevula and the lands acquired from the claimants is only about 2 KMs distance. The lands in Boyarevula village and the lands acquired from the claimants herein are similar in nature, potentiality and market value. The distance between Boyarevula and the lands acquired from the claimants is only about 2 KMs distance. The reference Court has also considered the documentary evidence exhibited by the claimants, Ex.B1 -certified copy of the common order dated 17.12.1999 passed in LAOP.No.1 of 2009 and its batch of OPs by the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Atmakur whereby the market value of Rs.30,000/-per acre fixed in respect of dry lands of Boyarevula village that were acquired for the purpose of Telugu Ganga Project under Award No.26/2004-05 dated 28.02.2005 through draft notification dated 02.08.1999 was enhanced to Rs.50,000/-per acre. Ex.B2 is a certified copy of Award No.26/2004-05, dated 28.03.2005 passed in respect of the dry lands acquired under the notification dated 02.08.1999 in Boyarevula village for the purpose of Telugu Ganga Project wherein the market value of the acquired land was fixed at Rs.30,000/-per acre. Ex.B3 is the true copy of the map of Bandi Atmakur Mandal. Ex.B4 is the certified copy of the common judgment dated 19.02.2007 passed in AS.Nos.1068, 1871, 1874, 1877, 1880 and 1885 of 2004 by this Court whereby the market value of Rs.30,000/-per acre fixed in respect of dry lands acquired in Velugodu village through draft notification dated 06.04.1984 for the purpose of formation of Velugodu balancing reservoir was confirmed. The reference court taking into consideration the compensation granted in the above referred notifications, passed judgment and decree fixing the market value of the rain-fed dry lands (category No.I) at Rs.32,000/-and the market value of the dry lands having irrigation sources like wells, bore wells (Category No.II) at Rs.36,000/-per acre besides 30% solatium on the market value and additional market value @ 12% from the date of section 4(1) notification of the Act till the date of award or taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Om Prakash (supra), the land value is being increased yearly at 10% to 12%. We found that the reference court having taken into consideration the evidence of RWs1. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Om Prakash (supra), the land value is being increased yearly at 10% to 12%. We found that the reference court having taken into consideration the evidence of RWs1. to 4 and also exhibits marked -Exs.B1 to B5 came to the conclusion that the acquisition of the lands in the said notification and present notification are for the same purpose of excavation of Telugu Ganga Project canal and these lands are in the alignment of Telugu Ganga Project. We see no grounds to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the reference court. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the Land Acquisition Appeal Suits are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.