J. N. BHATT, J. ( 1 ) SINCE this batch of 23 appeals under Sec. 54 of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (the Act) arises out of common judgment and award and raises identical questions, and upon joint request, these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. ( 2 ) PURSUANT to the preliminary notification under Sec. 4 (1) of the Act published in government gazette on 16. 8. 1990 for the purpose of branch canal for Narmada project, agricultural lands of villages Kelod of Bharuch district came to be acquired followed by notification under Sec. 6 published on 27. 12. 1990. The Land Acquisition Officer offered an amount of Rs. 180/- per Are by way of compensation by his order and award dated 27. 6. 1991 which was not acceptable to the respondent-original claimants, as a result of which a Reference under Sec. 18 of the Act came to be made at the instance of the respondents before the District Court at Bharuch. Out of Land Reference Case Nos. 374/92 to 393/92 and 11 to 13/95 which came to be decided by the learned Assistant judge, Bharuch by common judgment and award dated 26. 6. 1996, the aforesaid, Land reference cases were partly allowed. The Reference Court held that the claimants are entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs. 680/- per Are for the acquired lands. In view of the facts and circumstances and the evidence on record, the Reference Court allowed the aforesaid References partly and held that (i) every claimant is entitled to get additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 500/- per Are for the entire land; (ii) every claimant is entitled to get solatium at the rate of 30% on the market value under Sec. 23 (2) of the Act; (iii) every claimant is entitled to get 12% interest per annum from the date of publication of the notification under Sec. 4 of the Act till date of (he award; (iv) every claimant is eligible to get additional compensation from the date of possession of acquired lands at the rate of 9% interest for the first year and thereafter 15% for subsequent year, till payment of compensation. Being aggrieved by the common judgment and award of the Reference Court, the special Land Acquisition Officer, Bharuch has preferred 23 appeals invoking aid of provisions of Sec. 54 of the Act. Being aggrieved by the common judgment and award of the Reference Court, the special Land Acquisition Officer, Bharuch has preferred 23 appeals invoking aid of provisions of Sec. 54 of the Act. ( 3 ) THE challenge is against the common award granting additional compensation to the claimants. The only question which is raised for consideration and adjudication in this entire batch of appeals is whether the award of additional amount passed by the District court is excessive and requires our interference exercising our power under Sec. 54 of the Act. ( 4 ) THE claimants placed reliance on the evidence of witness Motibhai Mohanabhai patel, Ex. 10 who is one of the claimants. the Land Acquisition Officer offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 180a per Are by his order dated 27. 6. 1991 in respect of the land acquired pursuant to notification under Sec. 4 published on 16. 8. 1990 against the claim of Rs. 1,250/- per Are made by the claimants. The Reference Court placed reliance on the award in respect of agricultural lands situated in village Samni in Land Reference case No. 606 of 1986. Certified copy of the award in the said case was produced before the Reference Court at Ex. 11. ( 5 ) THE Reference Court placed reliance on the award Ex. 11 which has become final. It was in respect of agricultural lands situated in village Samni for the same purpose of narmada project arising out of acquisition of land pursuant to the notification published under Sec. 4 of the Act dated 20. 3. 1983. It was an award of the District Court, Bharuch in which compensation of Rs. 460/- per Are was awarded. It was found by the Reference court from the evidence on record that the said award is comparable, relevant and material for the purpose of adjudicating the claim made by the claimants, holding that it is good evidence for fixing market value of the acquired land i. n question at village kelod. ( 6 ) THE Reference Court observed that in view of the evidence on record, the lands of village Samni and the lands of village Kelod are adjoining. In case of the award in respect of agricultural lands of village Samni, produced at Ex. 11, compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs. 460/- per Are in the year 1983. ( 6 ) THE Reference Court observed that in view of the evidence on record, the lands of village Samni and the lands of village Kelod are adjoining. In case of the award in respect of agricultural lands of village Samni, produced at Ex. 11, compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs. 460/- per Are in the year 1983. The Reference Court awarded compensation taking into account the aspect that there will be 10% increase in the market value of agricultural lands of village Kelod per year. Considering the period of seven years, the Reference Court fixed the market value of agricultural lands of village acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer at the rate of Rs. 680/- per Are. It was found by the Reference Court that the market value by way of appreciation of the agricultural lands, obviously and surely will increase at 10% from 1983 to 1990. Thus, the Reference court awarded additional amount of Rs. 500/- per Are. ( 7 ) THE Reference Court found that boundaries of village Samni and village Kelod are adjoining. In view of the evidence or record, the lands of village Samni and villager kelod were found of the same quality in respect of fertility and productivity. In addition to that, it was also found that there is narrow gauge railway station in village Kelod which is, as such, situated within the radius of 1. 5 k. ms. Village Kelod is also situated on bharuch-Jambuar State Highway. Lands of both the villages are unirrigated. It could, therefore, very well be seen from the impugned common judgment and award that earlier award of the District Court in respect of acquisition of agricultural lands situated in village Samni and produced at Ex. 11 is very much relevant and comparable and, therefore, the Reference Court awarded enhanced amount of Rs. 500/- per Are over and above Rs. 180/- per Are offered by the Land Acquisition Officer. Agricultural lands of village Sudi and village Ora were not found comparable in view of distance of 3 k. ms. from village Samni. Therefore, the market value for the acquired land of village Sudi at rs. 380/- per Are in the year 1985 was not accepted as a guide or instance for fixing the market of agricultural lands of village Kelod. from village Samni. Therefore, the market value for the acquired land of village Sudi at rs. 380/- per Are in the year 1985 was not accepted as a guide or instance for fixing the market of agricultural lands of village Kelod. The following aspects have not been disputed in this group of 23 appeals under Sec. 54 of the Act at the instance of the appellant-Land Acquisition Officer : (i) that the award passed by the District Court, Bharuch in respect of agricultural lands situated at village Samni and of lands in Land Reference case No. 377 of 1992, a copy whereof came to be produced at Ex. 11, has become final; (ii) that the lands of both village Kelod and Samni are not irrigated and are comparable with additional advantage to the lands situated at village Kelod in view of the aforesaid aspects; (iii) village Kelod and village Samni have common boundaries and distance between the lands covered under the earlier award of the District Court in land Reference Case No. 377 of 1992 are only at distance of 1. 5 k. ms. from the lands acquired situated in village Kelod. (iv) There was no sale instance or transaction for village Kelod. ( 8 ) AFTER having examined the facts and circumstances emerging from the record of the present case and the relevant proposition of law, the assessment of market value fixed by the Reference Court at Rs. 680/- per Are in respect of acquired agricultural lands of village Kelod could not be shown to be excessive or exorbitant or unreasonable. The lands of both the villages are comparable lands in respect of quality, fertility, nature and type of lands. The acquisition of lands of village Samni for the same purpose of Narmada project took place vide notification published under Sec. 4 of the Act dated 20. 3. 1983. The date of publication of notification under Sec. 4 (1) of the Act in respect of the acquired lands of village Kelod was 16. 8. 1990. Therefore, in the absence of any other evidence of sale instance, the reliance placed by the Reference Court on the amount of compensation awarded by the District Court in respect of agricultural lands of village samni is justified. 8. 1990. Therefore, in the absence of any other evidence of sale instance, the reliance placed by the Reference Court on the amount of compensation awarded by the District Court in respect of agricultural lands of village samni is justified. Nothing has been, successfully, pointed out from the record of the present case on behalf of the appellant-Land Acquisition Officer that the common award and judgment in respect of the acquired lands of village Kelod assessing compensation at the rate of Rs. 480/- per Are is in any way illegal, unreasonable or unjust. We are also satisfied that assessment of the market value and resultant compensation granted by the reference Court to the respondent- claimants is justified. ( 9 ) UNDER Sec. 23 of the Act, provision is made, whereby, the factors to be considered in determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for the land acquired under the Act have been prescribed. The principles governing grant of assessment of market value and resultant compensation in case of acquisition of land have been extensively explored, examined and evaluated by catena of judicial pronouncements. ( 10 ) THE market value is value to a seller of property in its actual condition, at the time of acquisition, with existing advantages and possibilities excluding any advantage due to carrying out of the scheme for the purpose for which the property is compulsorily acquired. The market value as used in Sec. 23 is the price that an owner willing and not obliged to sell might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser with whom he was bargaining for the sale and purchase of the land. It is the price which would be obtainable in the market or a concrete parcel of land with its peculiar advantages and its particular draw-backs. ( 11 ) THE market value is the commercial value of the land and the authority or court, while making assessment of the market value for the purpose of compensation to be awarded in respect of acquisition of land or property, has to put itself in arm-chair of willing purchaser. The test propounded in this behalf by catena of judicial pronouncements is to see that the owner of the land acquired under the Act is given compensation of the market value of the land or property obtainable as on the date of publication of notification under Sec. 4 of the Act. The test propounded in this behalf by catena of judicial pronouncements is to see that the owner of the land acquired under the Act is given compensation of the market value of the land or property obtainable as on the date of publication of notification under Sec. 4 of the Act. The theory of restitutive compensation is not applicable but, at the same time, it is settled proposition of law that for determining valuation of the land or property in question under Sec. 23 of the Act, the court is obliged to occupy arm-chair of prudent seller but not anxious purchaser and determine the valuation. What should be the approach of the court in such factual situation is stated in number of decisions. ( 12 ) AS could be seen from the facts emerging from the record of the present case, there was no evidence of comparable sale instances. Therefore, the award of the district Court for compensation made in respect of agricultural lands almost of the same village as that of the lands acquired is rightly held to be comparable, reasonable and acceptable. The award which is relied on by the Reference Court in assessment of the market value and fixing amount of compensation has become final. The agricultural lands covered under the earlier award of the District Court situated in village Samni and the agricultural lands situated in village Kelod covered under the award of the Reference Court under challenge in these appeals are situated in the adjoining villages within a distance of 1. 5 k. ms. Therefore, they are comparable units. ( 13 ) THE Reference Court has rightly adopted gradual rise in price at the rate of 10% per annum from 1984 to 1990, which is quite justified. The earlier award, therefore, is good guide and acceptable instance for assessment of the market value and the amount of compensation. No evidence was led on behalf of the appellants before the Reference Court. The evidence led by the claimants before the Reference court remained unimpeachable. Therefore, the amount of compensation assessed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs. 680/- per Are in place of Rs. No evidence was led on behalf of the appellants before the Reference Court. The evidence led by the claimants before the Reference court remained unimpeachable. Therefore, the amount of compensation assessed by the Reference Court at the rate of Rs. 680/- per Are in place of Rs. 180/- per Are offered by the Land Acquisition officer against the claim of Rs 1,250/- per Are cannot be said to be unreasonable, unjust or in any way illegal requiring interference of this court exercising its power under Sec. 54 of the Act. ( 14 ) THE entitlement of additional amount in view of provisions of amended Sec. 23 has not been questioned and rightly sq. in view settled proposition of law. The Reference court has found that claimants are entitled to get 30% solatium of the market value and also amount of 12% increase on additional compensation from the date of publication of notification under Sec. 4 till the date of award under Secs. 23 (1-A) and 23 (2) of the Act. It will not, therefore, be necessary to enter into this aspect in this batch of appeals. ( 15 ) SINCE the controversy has shrunk down to a very narrow dimension, it was repeatedly requested jointly that instead of deciding the question of interim relief, the entire batch of appeals may be taken up for final hearing by us. In support of this submission, it was also jointly contended that the basis of the award under challenge in this group of appeals was the award made by the District Court for the same purpose which has become final. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances, we have acceded to the joint request. ( 16 ) AFTER having taken into account all relevant facts and circumstances emerging from the record of the present case and the relevant proposition of law, we are of the opinion that the entire batch of 23 appeals is required to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed while confirming the common judgment and award of the reference Court. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. .