JUDGMENT A.L. Vaidya, J. 1. The aforesaid appeals have been directed against the same Award dated 11-3-1992 passed by the District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, Himachal Pradesh. Hence these appeals are being disposed of through a common judgment. 2. Various parcels of lands owned by the claimant-Respondents were acquired for the public purpose, namely, for the construction of 'Kala Amb-Nagal- Shakti' road. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter to be called as "the Act") was published in the Rajpatra on 4-9-1982. The Land Acquisition Collector made the Award on 31-10-1985 and assessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 1310/- per bigha for all types of lands, though the acquired lands were of different qualities. 3. The claimants preferred separate petitions under Section 18 of the Act before the Land Acquisition Collector who referred the same for decision of the learned District Judge. The claimants assailed the Award given by the Land Acquisition Collector and demanded Rs. 30,000/- per bigha as the market value for the acquired land. 4. The present Appellant contested the petition and the Court below, after recording the evidence and hearing parties, ssessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 14,000/- per bigha for all categories of land. The learned District Judge also allowed statutory interest not only on the market value of the land but also on 30 per cent solarium. 5. Learned Advocate General has assailed the aforesaid Award of the learned District Judge mainly on the following two grounds: (i) The market value has been assessed without there being any legal evidence; and (ii) Interest on solatium could not be legally granted. 6. In so far as the market value assessed by the learned District Judge is concerned, the submissions put-forth by the learned Advocate General do not carry any legal weight whatsoever. 7. It is in evidence that village Ogli, where the acquired land is situated, is also known as Kala Amb which is a fast developing industrial complex. It has come in evidence that there were about 100 factories in the area and there were about 200 shops in Kala Amb. The factories situated in the area produced steel, cloth, cement, cardboard etc. etc. It has come in evidence that there were about 100 factories in the area and there were about 200 shops in Kala Amb. The factories situated in the area produced steel, cloth, cement, cardboard etc. etc. It has also come in evidence that there are various residential houses in that area and there was scarcity of land in the area and the people were not selling the same. The claimants have also stated that the acquired land was a plain one and was suitable for construction of residential houses, shops and factories. The acquired land has been stated to be about 400 metres from the police post koala Amb. 8. Shri Nur Mohd, one of the claimants, also deposed on oath that vide registered sale deed Ex. P1 he along with other claimants sold five biswas of land on 10-5-1982 for Rs. 5,000/- in favour of Bhim Raj, that is, at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per bigha. According to him, the land sold by him was very steep (Dhank). 9. P.W. 3 is Mohinder Kumar who purchased 13 biswas of land on 17- 7-1981 from S/Shri Gafoor and Reham Din vide registered sale deed Ex. P2 dated 17-7-1981. The consideration price, as stated by him, was Rs. 8,000/-. Per bigha rate comes out to Rs. 12,307/-. The witness further stated that major portion of the land purchased by him was again very steep. He has also added that the value of the plain land at that time in that area was about Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- per bigha. He further added that in the year 1987 he had sold the land for Rs. 40,000/- per bigha. According to him, the area was an industrial area and there were many factories in the area. 10. There is Anr. sale deed Ex. P4 brought on record on the basis of which five biswas of land was sold on 16-7-1981 at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per bigha. This instance has not been legally proved on record. 11. The present Appellant on the other hand has brought on record the sale deeds Ex. RA, Ex. RB, Ex. RC, Ex. RD, Ex. RE, Ex. RF and Ex. RG. These sale deeds have to be ignored, having not been legally proved. Neither the vendors nor the vendess in these sale deeds have been examined. 12. 11. The present Appellant on the other hand has brought on record the sale deeds Ex. RA, Ex. RB, Ex. RC, Ex. RD, Ex. RE, Ex. RF and Ex. RG. These sale deeds have to be ignored, having not been legally proved. Neither the vendors nor the vendess in these sale deeds have been examined. 12. The learned District Judge has dealt with the entire evidence examined by the parties and has appreciated the same in a proper and legal manner. The Court v. below has relied upon Ex. P1, the sale deed produced by the claimants themselves, on the basis of which five biswas of land was sold for Rs. 5,000/- and the rate per bigha comes to be Rs. 20,000/-. According to the learned District Judge, this sale deed being nearest in proximity to the date of publication of notification assumed significance and allowing 25 per cent deductions on the ground that it was a sale of a smairpiece of land the rate of the land still worked out to be Rs. 15,000/- per bigha. Ex. P2 has also been referred by the learned District Judge on the basis of which on 17-7-1981 the land was sold at the rate of Rs. 12,307/- per bigha. This sale was effected in July 1981 prior to the notification under Section 4 of the Act. 13. Taking into consideration the over-all evidence examined in the present proceedings, the learned District Judge was absolutely correct in assessing the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 14,000/- per bigha especially when the area where the acquired land was situated was an industrial area and the land was suitable for construction of residential houses or factories. In this view of the matter, the submission of the learned Advocate General does not hold good inasmuch as the market value has been assessed by the District Judge on legally competent evidence examined during the trial of the case. 14. The other point urged by the learned Advocate General with respect to the grant of interest on solatium, has to be favourably considered. The Apex Court in State of Haryana and Anr. v. Joginder Singh 1997 3 SCC 628 has held that interest on solatium cannot be allowed. Similar was the view earlier taken in Prem Nath Kapoor and Anr. v. National Fertilizers Corporation of India Ltd. And (l)Shim. The Apex Court in State of Haryana and Anr. v. Joginder Singh 1997 3 SCC 628 has held that interest on solatium cannot be allowed. Similar was the view earlier taken in Prem Nath Kapoor and Anr. v. National Fertilizers Corporation of India Ltd. And (l)Shim. L.C. State of H. P. v. MST. Darshani Devi and Ors. 1996 2 SCC 71. The District Judge, as such, has acted illegally in awarding interest on solatium also. 15. Thus, it is held that No. interest is allowable on the amount of solatium and, as such, the interest so allowed by the District Judge, is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. 16. In view of the foregoing reasons, the present appeals are partly accepted and as a consequence thereof the Atfard of the learned District Judge is set-aside in so far as the grant of interest on solatium is concerned. The Award of the District Judge assessing the market value at the rate of Rs. 14,000/- per bigha of the acquired land is, however, maintained. Parties are left to bear their own costs.