JUDGMENT : S.C. Mohapatra, J. - This is an appeal u/s 54 of the Land Acquisition Act. 2. 41 decimals of land in revenue village Gadakan at that time under new Capital Police-station in the district of Puri was acquired under the Act for establishment of Railway Coach Repairing Workshop Land Acquisition Collector offered compensation Rs. 33,300/- per acre. Claimant received compensation awarded by the Collector under protest and requested for a reference claiming higher compensation, Accordingly, reference u/s 18 of the Act was made to the Court. 3. In the trial court, two witnesses were examined on behalf of the claimant and a judgment in First Appeal No. 200 of 1971 was exhibited as Ext. 1. A sale deed dated 14-8-1978 was exhibited as Ext. 2. Collector, in support of the rate offered has examined one witness as O.P.W. 1. Trial court, on consideration of the materials on record, held that the compensation offered by the Collector is justified and accordingly, held that the claimant is not entitled to any further amount by way of higher compensation Aggrieved by the said award, present appeal has been prefer red by the claimant. 4. Compensation is to be awarded on the market value of the land on the date of its Notification u/s 4(1) of the Act. Neither the claimant nor the Collector furnished the said date to the Court for determination of the market value. However, it is not disputed that the publication of the Notification u/s 4(1) and the declaration u/s 6 of the Act in the year 1979 are in close proximity of time and accordingly, both parties accepted that market value is to be determined as in the year 1979. 5. Evidence of witnesses for the claimant are not very satisfactory in this case for determination of market value of the land. Ext. 1 is a judgment of this Court in F.A. No. 200 of 1913. In that case one acre 6 decimals of land was acquired in the same revenue village for the purpose of development and remodeling of Mancheswar Railway Station Yard by Notification u/s 4(1) of the Act published on 14-3-1957. Acquired land was held to have potentialities of a good business place being near a Railway Station and also was not very far off from Bhubaneswar which in 1957 was gradually gaining importance. Acquired land was held to have potentialities of a good business place being near a Railway Station and also was not very far off from Bhubaneswar which in 1957 was gradually gaining importance. Taking these facts and gradual price rise into consideration, compensation at the rate Rs. 50,000/- per acre was a warded. Sale deed Ext. 2 is of the year 1978 in respect of 16 decimals of Sarada Dofasli land in the same village where under the land was purchased for a consideration of Rs. 14,000/-. This rate of the purchase land would thus come to about 90,000/- per acres. The land under Ext. 2 is at a distance of 700 to 800 feet from the land under acquisition in the present case. 6. Trial court did not accept Ext. 2 on the ground that the land thereunder was Sarada Dofasli whereas the land under acquisition is Taila land. Added to the same, price paid by a willing purchaser for, 16 decimals of land cannot be the standard for land having an area at three times more Ext. 1 was not accepted to be the basis by the trial Court since land acquired in that case was near the Railway Station having a glass factory whereas the land in the present case is at a distance of about three kilometers from the Railway-station. 7. Mr. S.K. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that onus lies on the claimant who stands in the position of a Plaintiff in the suit to prove that the compensation awarded by the Collector is wrong. Legal proposition of Mr. Das is correct. Although claimant has not been able to prove specifically the market value of similar land in the area at the time of Notification u/s 4(1) of the Act, he has been able to prove by Exts. 1 and 2 that the rate at which Collector offered compensation is definitely raw. If the Collector would have proved one sale dead which is stated to be the basis for offering compensation at the rate offered the consideration would have been different. When land of a person is compulsorily acquired under the Act, Statutory authorities have a duty to fairly place materials before the Court which were the basis for the rate at which compensation is offered. When land of a person is compulsorily acquired under the Act, Statutory authorities have a duty to fairly place materials before the Court which were the basis for the rate at which compensation is offered. If some support is available on record, stranger evidence would be required to be adduced by the claimant to prove the same to be wrong. In the absence of any evidence by the land Acquisition Collector, adverse inference can be drawn that the documents relied upon by him if produced would not have supported his inference. Besides claimant has been able to prove on the strength of Exts. 1 and 2 that the compensation offered by the Collector is law. 8. Once the rate at which compensation is offered is held to be law, the correct rate is to be determined. As has been earlier held, neither Ext. 1 nor Ext 2 would be the rate available for compensation payable to the Appellant. When in 1957, 1 acre 6 decimals were acquired at Rs. 50,000/- per acre, 41 decimals when acquired at that time would have higher rate land under Ext. 1 was, however, of much superior quality having Petitioners which are not available to the land, in question being at a distance of about 3 kilometers away from the Railway Station. If this land would have been acquired in the year 1957 it can reasonably be quessed to have a rate of about twenty thousand rupees per acre since it had not similar advantages in Ext. 1. Ext. 2 is the sale deed whereunder 16 decimals of land was sold at the rate of about 90,000/- rupees per acre in 1978. If 41 decimals of such land would have been sold it would have fetched lesser rate which may reasonably quessed to be Rs. 75,000/- per acre land, under Ext. 2 was of better quality than the acquired land. Thus, land under acquisition can reasonably be quessed to have the price at a rate of about Rs. 60,000/- per acre, taking into consideration gradual rise in price of land and the area acquired. Three times increase in the rate in course of twenty-two years from 1957 is a reasonable inference. I am, therefore, satisfied that in the year 1979 when the land was acquired, the rate would be Rs. 60,000/- per acre. 60,000/- per acre, taking into consideration gradual rise in price of land and the area acquired. Three times increase in the rate in course of twenty-two years from 1957 is a reasonable inference. I am, therefore, satisfied that in the year 1979 when the land was acquired, the rate would be Rs. 60,000/- per acre. Compensation is payable for the acquired land at that rate on the materials available in this case. 9. During pendency of this acquisition, the Act, has been amended by Act 68 of 1984 giving better statutory benefits to the claimant as is entitled to the statutory benefits as amended by Act 68 of 1984. 10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. There shall be no order as to costs in this appeal. Final Result : Allowed