ORDER : 1. On 3.9.1957, The Chief Commissioner, Delhi Administration issued a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), proposing to acquire a large tract of land situate in villages Zamrudpur and Garhi-Jharia-Maria for public purpose viz., for execution of the interim general plan for greater Delhi. The appellants' land situate at villages Zamrudpur and Garhi-Jharia-Maria were also covered by the aforesaid notification. Subsequently, the said notification was followed by a notification issued under Section 6 of the Act. On 5.10.1969, the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as 'the Collector') awarded compensation for the acquired land situate at village Zamdurdpur@ Rs. 2.50 per sq. yard. The Collector awarded compensation for the acquired land situate at village Garhi-Jharia-Maria@ Rs. 2/- and Rs. 1.50 per sq. yard respectively, for two categories of land. The appellants' land situate at village Garhi-Jharia-Maria was categorised as 'B' category of land and, therefore, awarded compensation@ Rs. 1.50 per sq. yard. The appellants being not satisfied with the award given by the Collector sought reference. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation from Rs. 2/- to Rs. 5/- per sq. yard in respect of the land situate at village Zamrudpur. Whereas, the compensations in respect of the land of two categories situate at village Garhi-Jharia-Maria were enhanced from Rs. 2/- to Rs. 3.80 and Rs. 1.50 to Rs. 3.50 per sq. yard for two categories of land, respectively. The appellants were still not satisfied with the award of compensation by the Reference Court and, therefore, filed separate civil appeals before the High Court for further enhancement of the compensation. The High Court by a common judgment and order dismissed the appeals. It is against the said judgment and order of the High Court, the present appeals have been filed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants urged that there cannot be two different rates of compensation for similarly situated land in the same village and acquired under the same acquisition proceeding. Learned counsel pointed out that the Reference Court has awarded compensation for similarly situated acquired land under the same notification@ Rs. 6/- per sq. yard and, whereas, the appellants' were awarded compensation for the acquired land at village Zamrudpur@ Rs. 5/- per sq. yard which is erroneous. We find substance in the argument. 3. It is not disputed that by Exh. 6/- per sq. yard and, whereas, the appellants' were awarded compensation for the acquired land at village Zamrudpur@ Rs. 5/- per sq. yard which is erroneous. We find substance in the argument. 3. It is not disputed that by Exh. A-12, the Reference Court had awarded compensation@ Rs. 6/- per sq. yard for the land situate at village Zamrudpur acquired under the notification dated 3.9.1957 and the same has attained finality. It is also not disputed that the appellants' land is also situate at the same village having same potentiality. We are, therefore, of the view that the appellants are also entitled to same rate of compensation i.e.@ Rs. 6/- per sq. yard for their land situate at village Zamrudpur. 4. So far as the compensation in respect of land situate at village Garhi- Jharia-Maria is concerned, we have looked into the map (Ext. A-17) and found that some of the lands of the appellants situate at village Garhi-Jharia- Maria lie between two pieces of acquired land of village Zamrudpur. The appellants' land situate at village Garhi-Jharia-Maria is contiguous to the land situate at village Zamrudpur. We further find that the situation and potentiality of the appellants' land situate at village Garhi-Jharia-Maria is the same as that of the land situate at village Zamrudpur. We are, therefore, of the view that the appellants are entitled to compensation at the same rate as was granted in respect of the acquired land situate at village Zamrudpur. We are also of the view that categorisation of the land by the Collector was not correct. For the aforesaid reasons, we enhance compensation in respect of the land situate at village Garhi-Jharia-Maria from Rs. 3.50 to Rs. 6/- per sq. yard. 5. The appellants also claimed interest under Section 4(3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1967. The High Court was of the view that the appellants are entitled to interest under Section 4(3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1967, but the same shall be granted provided there is no overlapping of interest awarded under Section 28 of the Act. This view of the High Court is not correct. In Mamleshwar Prasad (d) by Lrs. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. This view of the High Court is not correct. In Mamleshwar Prasad (d) by Lrs. & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. decided on August 24, 1995 (Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P.) No. 10567/1985), it was held that the claimants are entitled to interest under Section 4(3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1967, in addition to other interest which is payable under the provisions of the Act. Following the said decision, we direct that the appellants shall be entitled to interest under sub-section (3) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1967 from the date on which the three-year period from the date of Section 4 notification expired upto the date of tender or payment of compensation awarded by the Collector for the acquisition of their land, even if any interest is paid to the appellants under any other provisions of the Act. 6. To sum up, the appellants are entitled to compensation@ Rs. 6/- per sq. yard for their acquired land situate at villages Zamrudpur as well as Garhi-Jharia-Maria and further are entitled to interest under Section 4(3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1967, in addition to any other interest payable to them under the Act, 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeals deserve to succeed. The appeals are accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.