Y. B. BHATT, J. ( 1 ) THESE are appeals filed by the State under Sec. 54 of the Land acquisition Act, read with Sec. 96, CPC. They are taken up for final hearing today on the joint request of learned Counsel for the respective parties. The acquisition pertains to the narmada Canal Project and in particular, the Luvara Brach Canal. Sec. 4 notification was issued on 21st November, 1995 where the lands in village Pisad, Taluka Vagra, District bharuch came to be acquired. The claimants had demanded compensation at the rate of rs. 1,500/- per before the Land Acquisition Officer whereas the latter had awarded only rs. 75/- per acre. ( 2 ) THE Reference Court, in the common judgment and award, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 450/- per acre. t with First Appeal No. 1255 to 1276 of 1994, decided on 16th February, 1998. ( 3 ) THE impugned judgment and awards, taken in its overall perspective, is, in our opinion, not assailable. We agree with the assessment of the evidence on the part of the tribunal, the conclusions drawn therefrom and the findings of fact recorded. ( 4 ) WE may, however, refer to a few salient points on the basis of which the said awards are required to be upheld. Firstly, the Reference Court relied upon Exh. 10, which is an award passed in a cognate land reference case No. 763/88, which admittedly was accepted by the State inasmuch as no appeal therefrom was preferred. Under the latter award, the Reference Court had awarded Rs. 462/- per acre. These facts firstly are not disputed, and secondly, the same have been referred to and relied upon in another decision of this Court rendered in First Apeal Nos. 219 to 241 of 1994 dated 8th february, 1994. No doubt, the latter decision of the High Court, under reference pertained to acquisition from the village Sachan. However, it is common ground that the village Sachan and the village Pisad with which we are concerned in the present group of appeals are contiguous to each other. Moreover, there is no significant difference in the dates of Sec. 4 notification. In the former case the said notification was dated 3rd October, 1985, whereas in the present group of appeals the relevant notification is dated 21st November, 1985. Moreover, there is no significant difference in the dates of Sec. 4 notification. In the former case the said notification was dated 3rd October, 1985, whereas in the present group of appeals the relevant notification is dated 21st November, 1985. The notification in respect of land reference case No. 763/88 was dated 3rd October, 1985, i. e. , some what earlier than the one in the present group of appeals. It is for this reason that although the High Court in the aforesaid decision Confirmed or at least approved of the decision in land reference case No. 763/88 (Rs. 462/- per acre), the corresponding figure awarded by the Reference Court in the present group of appeals at Rs. 450/- per acre cannot in any manner be suggested to be confirmed. ( 5 ) XXX xxx xxx. ( 6 ) XXX xxx xxx. ( 7 ) XXX xxx xxx. .