EBERHARDT, Judge.
1. It is error in a condemnation case to charge that the jury might, in estimating the value of the land taken, consider other uses to which the land might be devoted when there was no evidence authorizing the jury to find that it was suitable for any use other than that to which it was devoted at the time of the taking, or from which a reasonable inference of suitability for other uses might be drawn. Central Ga. Power Co. v. Cornwell, 139 Ga. 1 ( 76 S.E. 387, AC 1914A 880); State Hwy. Dept. v. Whitehurst, 109 Ga. App. 737 ( 137 S.E.2d 371); State Hwy. Dept. v. Godwin, 109 Ga. App. 740 (2) ( 137 S.E.2d 351).
2. A charge that "the measure of damages for property actually taken is the fair market value of that particular property, and when this measure or rule will give just and adequate compensation to the condemnee, it is the rule that should be applied by you" is not subject to the criticism that it is argumentative, confusing or prejudicial.
Judgment reversed for the reason stated in the first headnote. Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 24, 1964.
EBERHARDT, Judge.
Eugene Cook, Attorney General, Richard L. Chambers, Horace E. Campbell, Jr., Assistant Attorneys General, Robert Lanyon, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, for plaintiff in error.