(1) BOTH the above appeals by grant of special leave are directed against the judgment of the Bombay High court dated 18/6/1975. (2) THE agricultural land of the appellants was acquired for public purposes. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued on 30/5/1961. The possession of the land was taken on 15/1/1962. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 5,400.00 per acre. The claimants aggrieved against the order of the Land Acquisition Officer sought reference under Section 18 of the Act claiming the compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,000.00 per acre. The learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Satara allowed the appeal in part and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre. In arriving at the aforesaid conclusion the learned Civil Judge placed reliance on an order of the Collector Exhibit 64 by which 11 acres of land had been sold to the State Transport Authority at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre in the year 1954. Both the Assistant Collector, Satara Division as well as the claimants filed appeals in the High court aggrieved against the order of.the learned Civil Judge. (3) THE High court by a common judgment dated 18/6/1975 decided both the appeals. The High court took the view that the Civil Judge was not correct in determining the compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre placing reliance on the transaction of sale made by the Collector in favour of the State Transport Authority. According to the High court the principle of willing seller and willing purchaser cannot be applied in the case of a transaction of sale made by the Collector in favour of the State Transport Authority. Taking the aforesaid view the High court dismissed the appeal filed by the claimants and allowed the appeal filed by the Assistant Collector, Satara Division. The High court upheld the order of the Land Acquisition Officer and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 5,400.00 per acre. Aggrieved against the order of the High court, the legal representatives of the deceased claimant have filed the above-mentioned two appeals in this court. The High court upheld the order of the Land Acquisition Officer and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 5,400.00 per acre. Aggrieved against the order of the High court, the legal representatives of the deceased claimant have filed the above-mentioned two appeals in this court. One appeal is against the dismissal of the appeal by the High court filed by the claimants for awarding the compensation at the rate of Rs 20,000.00 per acre and the other against the order of the High court by which the appeal filed by the Assistant Collector, Satara Division has been allowed and awarding the compensation at the rate of Rs. 5,400.00. (4) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and have thoroughly perused the record. Admittedly, the Collector by his order Exhibit 64 had sold II acres of land at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre to the State Transport authority. This transaction was of 1954, whereas the compensation of the land in question has to be determined on the date of the notification dated 30/5/1961 issued under Section 4 of the Act. When the Collector himself had valued the land at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre in the year 1954, we see no valid reason not to allow the claimants a compensation at the same rate as on 30/5/1961. The Collector is expected to have valued the land on some reasonable basis and the learned Civil Judge was right in placing reliance on Exhibit 64 for determining the compensation of the land in question on the same basis. It is nowhere the case of the respondent that the value fixed by the Collector in the order Exhibit 64 was on a higher side or was fixed without taking notice of the prevailing value of the land in 1954. It is further important to note that in Exhibit 63 a Panchnama prepared by the Superintendent City Survey Officer, Satara Division, the panches had estimated on the basis of the current market rate value of the land at Rs. 10,000.00 per acre in respect of the land sold, vide order Exhibit 64. Thus, considering the matter from any angle, we are of the view that the High court was wrong in reducing the compensation and allowing the same at the rate of Rs. 5,400.00 per acre only. 10,000.00 per acre in respect of the land sold, vide order Exhibit 64. Thus, considering the matter from any angle, we are of the view that the High court was wrong in reducing the compensation and allowing the same at the rate of Rs. 5,400.00 per acre only. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we hold that the learned Civil Judge was perfectly right and justified in awarding the compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre. (5) IN the result, we allow Civil No. 1432 of 1979 and set aside the judgment of the Bombay High court and restore the order of the learned Civil Judge allowing the compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000.00 per acre along with the solatium and interest as determined by the Civil Judge. (6) CIVIL No. 1433 of 1979 filed by the appellants claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,000.00 per acre does not survive and is accordingly dismissed. The parties shall bear their own costs in this court as well as in the High court.