JUDGMENT :

P.Naveen Rao, J.

These three appeals arise out of same land acquisition notification. The Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA), now called as Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), placed requisition with the District Collector, Ranga Reddy District to acquire land to an extent of Ac.1.31½ guntas in Sy.Nos.68 and 69, Madhapur village for widening of road from Kavuri Hills to Shilparamam. Draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) was issued on 05.07.2006.

(i) LAAS No.566 of 2017:

The land of claimant to an extent of 256 square yards falling in Sy.Nos.68 and 69 of Madhapur village bearing plot no.63 was part of the acquisition notification. The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) passed award No.23 of 2008 on 21.11.2008 granting compensation @ Rs. 3,040/- per square yard. Not satisfied with the said compensation, the claimant sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. The reference was placed before the Court of Special Sessions Judge for trial of Cases under SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. The reference was numbered as LAOP No.13 of 2012. The reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.30,000/- per square yard. Aggrieved thereby, the HMDA is in appeal in LAAS No.566 of 2017.

(ii) LAAS No.308 of 2016:

This appeal is by claimant in LAOP No.13 of 2012 and respondent in LAAS No.566 of 2017. Not satisfied with the compensation determined by the reference Court, the claimant is in appeal.

(iii) LAAS No.205 of 2017:

The land of claimant to an extent of 200 square yards in plot No.63/A in Sy.Nos.68 and 69 of Madhapur village was also included in Section 4(1) notification dated 05.07.2006. The LAO passed award No.23/2008 determined compensation at the rate of Rs. 3,040/- per square yard. Not satisfied with the amount of compensation claimant sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. The reference was placed before the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy district. The reference was numbered as LAOP No.15 of 2012. The reference Court determined the compensation @ Rs. 46,960/- per square yard. Aggrieved thereby, the HMDA preferred this appeal.

2. LAAS No.566 of 2017 and LAAS No.308 of 2016 arise out of reference Court order in LAOP No.13 of 2012, one by HMDA another by claimant. While HMDA contests the enhancement to Rs. 30,000/-per square yard, the claimant seeks further enhancement. The claimant wants same compensation as determined by another reference Court in LAOP No.15 of 2012, i.e., Rs. 46,960/- per square yard.

3. We have heard learned counsel Sri Vivek Jain for claimants and learned standing counsel Sri Y.Rama Rao for HMDA.

4. According to learned counsel Sri Vivek Jain, the reference Court in O.P.No.15 of 2012 correctly enhanced compensation to Rs. 46,960/- as the same is supported by evidence brought on record, whereas the reference Court in LAOP No.13 of 2012 erred in fixing the compensation @ Rs.30,000/- depriving just compensation to the claimant. According to learned counsel both properties are situated on the main road opposite to Shilparamam having lot of potentiality and higher future prospects. Therefore, the same would fetch higher market price compared to the compensation determined by the reference court in LAOP No.13 of 2012. Though even determination of Rs. 46,960/- by the reference Court in OP No.15 of 2012 may not be adequate compared to the prevailing market price, but the claimants are satisfied to that extent.

4.1. According to learned counsel, at about the same time, the HUDA conducted auction of house plots in Nandagiri Hills layout which were sold at far higher price i.e., at about Rs. 80,000/- per square yard. Similarly, the HMDA has conducted auction with base price at Rs. 4.50 crores and secured even upto Rs. 15 crores per acre in the pro