Judgment 1. This First Appeal arises out of a judgment and award dated 28th January, 1978 passed by Sri Victor Topno, 1st Additional Sub-Judge, Hazaribagh in L.R. No. 171/73, whereby and whereunder, the 75-88 said learned Court awarded a compensation of a sum of Rs. 14,241.78 paisa towards acquisition of land belonging to the appellant. By a notification dated 4-12-1979, issued u/s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 , the lands of the appellants in Plot No.390 measuring 84 decimals pertaining to Khata No.74 situate in Village Sarlai, P.S. and District Hazaribagh was acquired in Land Acquisition Case No. 10 of 1969-70 for construction of quarters of Damodar Valley Corporation staffs. 2. A declaration u/s. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was published on 22-9-1970. The learned Land Acquisition Officer awarded a compensation of Rs. 10,092.77 paisa to the appellants, who being aggrieved and dissatisfied therewith filed an application u/s. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, for reference of the said case before the Land Acquisition Judge. 3. According to the appellants, the land in question is situate within Hazaribagh Municipality and have all the facilities of a residential area. In the locality, there are several schools like St. Xaviers School, Zila School, Reformatory School, Teachers Training College as well as Tourists Centre, Circuit house, residential buildings of the District Officers, like the Suptd. of Police, Civil Surgeon, Executive Engineer, District Judge and various other highly palced public officers and leading citizens, Advocates, Doctors etc. It is further stated that the Civil Court, Collectorate, Police Office and the office of the Damodar Valley Corporation are situate within the distance of a few hundred yards from the land in question. 4. Before the learned Land Acquisition Judge, the appellant claimed the compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,000.00 per decimal. He further claimed a sum of Rs. 5,000.00 for causing improvement in the land in question. 5. Before the learned Court below only one document was put in evidence which was marked as Exbt. 2 by the said document, eight decimal of land situate in the same village was sold for a sum of Rs. 3,000.00 on 30th April, 1969. 6. The learned Land Acquisition Judge disbelieved the case of the appellants relating to his claim of having made any improvement on the land. So far as the aforementioned deed of sale (Exbt. 2 by the said document, eight decimal of land situate in the same village was sold for a sum of Rs. 3,000.00 on 30th April, 1969. 6. The learned Land Acquisition Judge disbelieved the case of the appellants relating to his claim of having made any improvement on the land. So far as the aforementioned deed of sale (Exbt. 2) is concerned, he did not rely upon the said document inter alia on the ground that the same was in respect of merely on an area namely 8 decimals whereas the area which was acquired by reason of the aforementioned notification of an area measuring 84 decimals. It is now well known that for assessment of market value price, which a willing purchaser may offer is the best criteria. 7. True, it is that the aforementioned deed dated 30th April, 1969 was in respect of a land measuring 8 decimals of land only, but for that there is absolutely no reason as to why the same should not be taken into consideration by way of a guideline. The site where the land is situate and the features thereof namely existence of various important schools, offices, Court and residential buildings of important citizens are not in dispute. It is true that the land in question was agricultural in nature, but the very fact that the purpose of acquisition was construction of staff quarters by the Damodar Valley Corporation, which has its office nearby was an important factor to be considered. From the very nature of acquisition, it was evident that the land in question was fit for construction of residential house. 8. It is now well known that potentiality of land is a relevant consideration for determination of market value. In this view of the matter, the rate with regard to the value of the land in the vicinity in respect where transactions have been effected at a time reasonably approximate to the time when notification u/s. 4 was issued is a safe guide for determination of market value. Further, the very fact that all important Offices of Hazaribagh are situate within the distance of few hundred yards from the land in question, clearly demonstrates that the same had a great potential value. 9. Further, the very fact that all important Offices of Hazaribagh are situate within the distance of few hundred yards from the land in question, clearly demonstrates that the same had a great potential value. 9. Further, for the purpose of assessment of market value, judicial notice can also be taken of the fact of continuous inflation and rising in valuation of immovable property, particularly in a town which is a district headquarter. Unfortunately, these aspects of the matter have not been taken into consideration by the learned lower Court. 10. In my opinion, upon taking into consideration of the evidence on record, the market value of the land should have been assessed at the rate of Rs. 30,000.00 per acre. Besides, the compensation which is to be determined on the aforementioned findings, the appellant, undoubtedly, is also to be entitled to solatium. 11. By reason of sec. 23(2), compensation granted by Act No.68 of 1984, the rate of solatium has been raised to 30 per cent from 15 per cent. In a large number of decisions, it has been held by the Supreme Court that 30 per cent solatium should be paid in such case also where appeals were pending on the date of coming into force of the aforementioned Act No. 68 of 1984. Reliance in this connection has also been made in Dipak Kumar Ghosh V/s. Mrs. Mira Sen, AIR 1987 SC 759 . 12. However, the said question is pending reconsideration before a constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court. In this view of the matter, it is directed that the appellant shall be entitled to get solatium at the rate of 30 per cent, and interest at the rate payable under Secs. 28 and 34 of the Act subject to the ultimate decision of Supreme Court by its constitutional Bench. It goes without saying that the appellant shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 9 per cent from the date, when the land in question was taken possession from him subject to the aforementioned condition till the actual payment thereof at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the amount of compensation. This appeal is allowed to the aforementioned extent. Let a decree be prepared accordingly. Appeal allowed.