ORDER 1. Though the respondents have been served none appeared on behalf of them. The appeal arises against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing the LPA No. 380 of 1977 dated 21-12-1977. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) was published on 23-4-1963 acquiring a total extent of 19 acres, 5 kanals and 3 marlas consisting the land situated in Khasra Nos. 29/21/2 (3 marlas), 29/22/2 (12 marlas), 29/23/1 (7 marlas) and 34/1/2 (7 marlas) and 32/1/2 (4 kanals 7 marlas) in Village Dera for establishing an Agricultural Market Committee. The Land Acquisition Collector in his award dated 12-10-1965 determined the market value of the land (Chahi) at the rate between Rs 2250 to Rs 3000 per acre and also total recompensation awarded at a sum of Rs 2875. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the District Judge enhanced the market value to Rs 400 per marla as claimed by the respondent in his reference applications under Section 18. 2. Dissatisfied therewith the appellant filed an RFA No. 193 of 1967 in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. But the learned Single Judge dismissed the same by judgment dated 2-9-1975 and affirmed the findings of the District Judge. Thereafter the appellant filed LPA before the said High Court which was dismissed in limine by the Division Bench on 21-12-1977. Thus, this appeal by special leave. 3. Shri S.M. Ashri, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the High Court and the reference court committed legal error in ignoring the sale deed Ex. R-2, executed in the year 1959 in which the appellant itself had purchased the land for a sum of Rs 10,000 of an extent of 3 bighas 15 biswas of land for a sum of Rs 12,533 on the ground that the sale was of 3 to 4 years prior to the date of the acquisition and, therefore, it does not offer any reasonable basis for fixation of the market value. On the other hand, the District Court relied upon a sale deed of 4-11-1963 in which the land to an extent of 16 marlas together with a building standing thereon was purchased for shopping purposes and for setting up a saw mill for a sum of Rs 10,000 which would work out at the rate of Rs 625 per marla and after allowing deduction the market value comes to Rs 400 per marla. The contention of Shri Ashri, the learned counsel for the appellant, is that the principle adopted by the District Court is erroneous and we find that the contention is well-founded. It is seen that the witness stated in the evidence that he purchased the open land for Rs 10,000 but the District Judge found that it was purchased with the construction standing thereon but debris. It is not a case of the respondent. The assumption appears to be based only on surmise and is unwarranted. A willing vendor would not offer to sell the land and building as debris unless there is specific evidence to that effect. As willing vendee, the respondent had purchased with an expectation that the price paid to the land together with the building standing thereon would constitute proper consideration for which he willingly paid the same. Even then also it is only for the purpose of establishing saw mill. Obviously he had his special advantages for purchasing that property. Accordingly, that would not furnish the true basis to determine the market value of the land in question. In particular the total extent of 19 acres is sought to be acquired for the purpose of establishing market yard. It is seen that admittedly the respondent appellant himself purchased 3 bighas 15 biswas practically more than 3/4th of an acre for a sum of Rs 12,000 and odd which would work out at the rate of Rs 120 per marla in the year 1959. Three years have passed by un obviously when the appellant has purchased the property in 1959 and after a gap of 3 to 4 years, as on the date of acquisition we are of the considered view that at least Rs 160 per marla would represent the proper market value. Three years have passed by un obviously when the appellant has purchased the property in 1959 and after a gap of 3 to 4 years, as on the date of acquisition we are of the considered view that at least Rs 160 per marla would represent the proper market value. Taking this factor into consideration we are of the considered opinion that the High Court has grievously committed error in not interfering with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 18 and District Judge also committed grievous error in awarding what has been asked for by the respondent. As seen earlier respondent himself claimed maximum of Rs 400 per marla and the District Judge has reckoned irrelevant factor in the circumstances and ignored the relevant factors in determining the market value. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The award of the Land Acquisition Court, namely, the District Court at Karnal under Section 18 is set aside and the market value is fixed at Rs 160 per marla in other words Rs 25,600 per acre. The respondents are entitled to the solatium at the rate of 15% on the enhanced market value and interest at 6% thereon. No costs. For Citation: 1995 Supp (1) SCC 309