Honble YADAV, J. – In this appeal two dominant questions of fundamental nature are involved. Firstly whether the learned Civil Judge, Doongarpur has committed serious illegality in rejecting the reference made to him under the Land Acquisition Act without giving any reason in support of his impugned judgment dated 11.1.83. Secondly, whether the learned Civil Judge was justified in rejectingthe reference made to him by Collector under the Land Acquisition Act without marshalling and weighing the evidence on record. (2). Brief facts leading upto filing of the present appeal are that the house in question of the claimant-appellants was acquired under the provisions of Rajasthan Land Acquisition Act in pursuant to publication of a notification under Section 6 of the said Act on 6.2.75 for construction of Kadana Dam. The claimant- appellants were aggrieved against the determination of compensation by the Land AcquisitionOfficer which was estimated by the Irrigation Department to be of Rs. 46, 913. (3). The claimant-appellants objected the aforesaid valuation claiming that the market value of their house of the compensation has been assessed by Irrigation Department at a very low figure and claimed that valuation of their house on the relevant date was Rs. 78,000/-. According to the claimant-appellants after addingto the aforesaid amount the solicium of 10 per cent i.e. Rs. 7,800/- they claimed to be entitled to receive compensation of Rs. 85,800/-. (4). The claimant-appellants produced a valuation report of Shri A.L. Maroo, retired Executive Engineer, P.W.D. and also produced two sale-deeds showing the higher valuation in support of their claim. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded asum of Rs. 50,599/- as the cost of the house including the land plus Rs. 5,060/- as solicium. Thus a total compensation of Rs. 55,659/- was awarded. (5). The claimant-appellants had not accepted the award given by Land Acquisition Officer and made a written application to the Collector requesting that the matter be referred for determination of the Civil Court regarding their measure-ment of the land as well as the amount of the compensation payable to them. The Collector accordingly referred the matter to the District Court who in turn transferred it for disposal to the learned Civil Judge. The learned Civil Judge refused to enhance the award and maintained the compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Officer. (6). Aggrieved against the aforesaid refusal to enhance the compensation by learned Civil Judge the present appeal has been filed. (7). The learned Civil Judge refused to enhance the award and maintained the compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Officer. (6). Aggrieved against the aforesaid refusal to enhance the compensation by learned Civil Judge the present appeal has been filed. (7). I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment under appeal. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties put a glance on the oral and documentary evidence available on record. (8). It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants that the learned Civil Judge has erred in law and facts in estimating the area to be only 180.30 sq. meters whereas according to report and statement on oath of Shri A.L. Maroo, registered valuer as well as from the statement of one of the claimants Tejpal it is 202.88 sq. meters. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the Engi-neer who made the measurements, calculations and consequently estimated the valuation on behalf of Irrigation Department namely Shri Mahesh Joshi was not examined by the Department but his valuation report has been proved by Prakash Chandra Tamrakar who has clearly admitted in his deposition that Shri Mahesh Joshi is still alive and he has no personal knowledge about the measurement of thehouse in dispute or its valuation. In nut shell the argument of the learned counsel for the appellants before this court is that the Irrigation Department has deliberately with-held the best evidence of Shri Mahesh Joshi. According to the learned counsel for the appellants non-examination of Shri Mahesh Joshi has also deprived their right to cross-examine and elucidate true facts from him. With vehemence learnedcounsel for the appellants pleaded that cross- examination is the only potent weapon in their hands to demonstrate the fact that measurement and calculation about valuation given by Shri Mahesh Joshi is not correct. Thus according to the learned counsel for the appellants non-examination of Shri Mahesh Joshi has caused a serious prejudice to them. (9). It is also contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that they have produced registered sale deeds which are on record in respect of neighbouring land executed by others near the relevant date from which market value of the house in question is to be determined. (9). It is also contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that they have produced registered sale deeds which are on record in respect of neighbouring land executed by others near the relevant date from which market value of the house in question is to be determined. He invited my attention towards one sale-deed in which total area sold under the registered sale-deed is disclosed to be 88 x 22 i.e. 179.56 sq. meters. The said house site has been sold for a sum of Rs. 12,000/-. According to mathematical calculation per square meter rate of the aforesaid house site comes to Rs. 66/- sq. meter whereas Shri Mahesh Joshi, Engineer has calculated the valuation of the land of the house in dispute only at therate of 29 per sq. meter which is grossly inadequate. Similarly another sale-deed is produced of a shop plot which has been sold for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- measuring 57 x 18 i.e. 95.32 sq. meters. The rate per square meter in this case comes to more than Rs. 100/- per sq. meter whereas in case of the shop land of the appellants have been allowed only at the rate of Rs. 41/- per sq. meter which is again grossly inade-quate. (10). Learned counsel for the appellants streneously urged that the learned Civil Judge in his impugned judgment simply catalogued the evidence oral and documentary and in one line arrived at a conclusion by simply saying that the award given by the Land Acquisition Officer is proper. (11). Learned counsel appearing on behalf of contesting respondents has supported the judgment impugned in feeble voice and argued that as the learned Civil Judge was confirming the award given by Land Acquisition Officer therefore he was not required to evaluate the evidence on record. (12). A close scrutiny of the judgment under appeal reveals that it is a laconicand cryptic judgment passed without analytical discussion of the oral and documentary evidence on record. It is nowhere mentioned what was the case of the claimant-appellants and what was the defence taken by the defendant-respondents opposing enhancement of plaintiffs compensation. It is also not mentioned in the judgment under appeal that what was the argument advanced by learnedcounsel for the claimant-appellants and the reply given by learned counsel for the defendant-respondents. (13). It is nowhere mentioned what was the case of the claimant-appellants and what was the defence taken by the defendant-respondents opposing enhancement of plaintiffs compensation. It is also not mentioned in the judgment under appeal that what was the argument advanced by learnedcounsel for the claimant-appellants and the reply given by learned counsel for the defendant-respondents. (13). Learned trial court has not given any reason or discuss any oral or documentary evidence whatsoever which persuaded it to believe that the claim of the claimant-appellants should not be enhanced from Rs. 55,649/- to Rs. 85,800/-.No reason or logic is given in support of rejecting the claim for enhancement of compensation and measurement of the house in dispute. The learned Civil Judge has also not given any reason as to why the statement of Shri A.L. Maroo about the measurement of the house in dispute should not be believed. I am of the view that this type of judgments are to be declared per se illegal and without justification. (14). An identical question came up for consideration before me in case of Madan Lal vs. Laxman Das (1996(2) WLC Raj. 74), where in paragraph 22 and 23 it was held which is reproduced below for ready reference :– ``22. It is well to remember that in judicial discipline those who are vested with judicial powers are expected to give reasons and to dis- cuss evidence or material in support of their conclusions. The reasons are link to the conclusion which indicate about application of mind to the facts and circumstances of the case together with law point or points with reference to the material on record. 23. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances this Court insists upon disclosure of reasons, materials or evidence in support of conclusions arrived at by Civil Courts on five grounds. Firstly, if the reasons and discussion of evidence or material in support of conclusions are given by the civil court then an aggrieved party in a proceeding before a higher court where such impugned order is amenable to an appeal or a revision may have an opportunity to demonstrate that the reasons, the evidence or materials which persuaded the court to reject his case were erroneous or non-existent. Secondly, the obligation to record reasons and discussion of evidence and materials operate as a deterrent against possible arbitrary decisions. Secondly, the obligation to record reasons and discussion of evidence and materials operate as a deterrent against possible arbitrary decisions. Thirdly, a laconic and cryptic order runs counter to the settled principles of law evolved by courts from time immemorial that justice should not only be done but it must appear to others that it has been done between the parties. Fourthly the reasons and discussion of evidences or mate- rials in support of conclusions are one of the most important components of principles of natural justice and fair play and lastly the disclosure of reasons and discussion of evidence or materials in support of conclusions are helpful to keep the scales of justice even and indicate towards the fair and neutral attitude of the court which is a fundamental principle of administration of justice. (15). I see no reason to differ from the proposition of law laid down by me in case of Madan Lal (supra) which is hereby reiterated. In abundant caution, in continuation of the aforesaid principle it is further held that it is not necessary by the civil courts to reproduce the evidence of each of the witness in the judgmentin verbatim but what is necessary is that evidence oral and documentary must be carefully analysed with reference to the salient points of law and facts arising in such cases referred to the civil courts under the Land Acquisition Act. Minimum and reasonable expectation from a civil court in a reference under Land Acquisition Act is that it should grasp and weigh the oral and documentary evidence in an inte-lligent and intelligible manner. The fact that entire material evidence on record has been so grasped and weighed must appear from the judgment itself. (16). In the present case, I am of the view that if the judgment under appeal is put on the anvil of the aforesaid test it is found to be lacking in all material particulars therefore it is liable to be set aside. It is made clear that the claimant-appellants had already received the compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Officer with protest, therefore, now the case is being remanded to the learned District Judge, Doongarpur with a direction to decide the reference himself or transfer it for decision to some other competent civil court to decide the reference other than the Civil Judge who has decided the reference under appeal. Since thematter is very old hence the parties are prohibited from tailoring or adducing any further evidence in support of their respective claims regarding measurement of the house in question and its valuation. The matter deserves to be decided on the basis of evidence already adduced by the parties in the light of the observations made in the body of this judgment. (17). As a result of aforementioned discussion the instant appeal is allowed. The judgment under appeal dated 11.1.83 is set aside and the case is remanded back to the learned District Judge, Doongarpur either to decide himself in the light of observation made in the body of this judgment or transfer it for decision on merits to some other competent civil court other than the Civil Judge who has decidedthe case under appeal. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case parties are left to bear their own costs.