J. N. BHATT, J. ( 1 ) IN this four groups of appeals, under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act) common questions are raised and they arise out of three awards of the same reference Court and upon joint request, they are being disposed of by this common judgment, simultaneously. ( 2 ) THE first group of appeals, bearing First Nos. 682 to 684 of 2000 and fourth group of first appeals bearing First Appeal Nos. 1880 to 1890 of 2000, arise out of the common award of reference Court, dated 15. 10. 99 and arise out of Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 436/99 to 448/99. The first group is at the instance of the acquisition authority and acquiring body, whereas, the fourth group is at the instance of the original owners of the land. In these groups of appeals, notification under section 4 (1) of the Act was issued on 22. 6. 90. ( 3 ) IN so far as the second group of appeals is concerned, they are at instance of acquisition authority and acquiring body and arising out of common award of reference Court dated 19. 2. 2000 out of the land Acquisition Reference Cases bearing Nos. 3206/93 to 3224/94 and 786/96 and 788/96. In this group, notification under section 4 (1) of the Act is dated 10. 8. 90. ( 4 ) IN the third group of appeals, the date of notification under section 4 (1) is dated 22. 6. 90 and challenge is against the common award passed by the same Court dated 18. 12. 99 arising out of Land Reference Case Nos. 250/99 to 267/99 and 902/99. ( 5 ) THE common purpose and object of acquisition of lands in this four groups of appeals is for construction of Narmada canal for Narmada dam, which, as such, has attracted global attention. The land involved is of village Karannagar. In first group of appeals, the Land Acquisition Officer by his award dated 25. 8. 92, assessed and offered an amount of Rs. 3. 90 per sq. mtr. against the claim of Rs. 100 per sq. mtr. made by the claimants. So is the position in group No. 4 as the entire group arising out of the common award, whereas, in appeals of group No. 2, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded the same amount per sq. mtr. by a separate order dated 3. 8. 90 per sq. mtr. against the claim of Rs. 100 per sq. mtr. made by the claimants. So is the position in group No. 4 as the entire group arising out of the common award, whereas, in appeals of group No. 2, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded the same amount per sq. mtr. by a separate order dated 3. 8. 93. So is the position in case of group No. 3. ( 6 ) THE claimants being dissatisfied by the assessment of compensation made by the Land Acquisition Officer at the rate of Rs. 3. 90 per sq. mtr. in the award of the Land Acquisition Officer, desired the competent authority to make reference under section 18 against the award of the Land Acquisition Officer under section 11 of the Act. That is how, the references came to be made to the District Court, at Mehsana. ( 7 ) ALL the references, in respect of these four groups of appeals were heard by the reference Court. The parties relied on oral, as well as, documentary evidence before the reference Court in three main groups. Earlier, comparable awards were cited and relied on by both the parties. The reference Court, after considering the facts and circumstances and the comparable awards relied on by the parties, decided three groups by three separate awards by enhancing the amount of compensation assessed and offered by the Land Acquisition Officer. In first group, the reference Court award is of 15. 10. 99, whereby, the claimants came to be awarded Rs. 35 per sq. mtr. except in one case in which the amount of Rs. 38 is awarded for special reasons which is not, seriously, in controversy in this group of appeals. Whereas, in the second group of appeals, the reference Court by its award dated 19. 2. 2000, awarded Rs. 40. 60 per sq. mtr. and in third group of matters the reference court awarded an amount of Rs. 35 per sq. mtr. by its award dated 18. 12. 99. The appeals involved in group 1, 2 and 3 are at the instance of the acquiring body and acquisition authority, whereas, fourth group, as stated earlier, is at the instance of some of the original claimants, whose land came to be acquired. 35 per sq. mtr. by its award dated 18. 12. 99. The appeals involved in group 1, 2 and 3 are at the instance of the acquiring body and acquisition authority, whereas, fourth group, as stated earlier, is at the instance of some of the original claimants, whose land came to be acquired. ( 8 ) IN short, 12 appeals under section 54 of the Act are, at the instance of the original claimants which is in group 4, whereas, 55 appeals are at the instance of the Acquisition Authority and acquiring body. ( 9 ) WE have heard the learned advocates appearing in this four groups of appeals, threadbare. They have taken us through the relevant oral, as well as documentary evidence in course of their submissions. We have, also, considered the relevant proposition of law and we have, also, examined the case law relied on and referred to in course of submissions before us, to which reference will be made by us hereinafter, as and when necessary. ( 10 ) WE have, in course of submissions before us, considered threadbare the factual profile and the material and relevant landscape of the facts and evidence. Since four groups are being disposed of by this common judgment arising out of three awards of the reference Court under section 18 of the Act, we deem it expedient to highlight the factual matrix in the following tabular form: ( 21 ) IN view of the aforesaid proposition of law, the market price could have been fixed in respect of lands acquired in village Karannagar at least at the rate of Rs. 42. 00 per sq. mtr. since there is a gap of 11 years after the award Ex. 24 came to be passed. It appears that the reliance on award Mark 65/1 dated 24. 4. 98 is though based on Ex. 24 award, the reference court has awarded only an amount of Rs. 35 per sq. mtr. in two group of matters and Rs. 40. 60 in other groups. On the basis of reliable comparable documentary evidence in the form of award produced at Ex. 24, the reference Court ought to have fixed the market price or market value at the rate of Rs. 42 per sq. mtr. in view of the aforesaid factual profile and settled legal proposition. 40. 60 in other groups. On the basis of reliable comparable documentary evidence in the form of award produced at Ex. 24, the reference Court ought to have fixed the market price or market value at the rate of Rs. 42 per sq. mtr. in view of the aforesaid factual profile and settled legal proposition. ( 22 ) OF course, the claimants have placed reliance on the award, at Ex. 26, dated 14. 12. 95 in respect of acquisition of land of village Chhatral in LAR No. 971/89 wherein the notification under section 4 of the Act was issued on 19. 8. 85 and in which an amount of Rs. 70 per sq. mtr. came to be awarded to the claimants. It is not in dispute that the lands covered under Ex. 26 are situated 3 k. m. away from lands covered under the impugned awards. We do not advance the proposition that award in respect of land situated 3 k. m away cannot be considered. But it need not be considered in the present group of appeals for the simple reason that when the awards which are comparable, reliable and in respect of lands close to the lands covered under the impugned award are available. Therefore, award Ex. 26 is required to be excluded from consideration in this group of appeals. ( 23 ) NO doubt, the reliance placed on Ex. 51 is also emphasised on behalf of the claimants. It is in respect of acquisition of land situated in same village, like that, Karannagar. The said award is dated 4. 11. 99 in LAR No. 3205/93, wherein, the date of notification under section 4 was 22. 6. 90. Therein, the reference Court awarded an amount of Rs. 40. 60 per sq. mtr. ( 24 ) AFTER having taken into consideration the entire testimonial collection and the relevant reliable and comparable documentary evidence, the assessment and evaluation of the market rate made by the reference court is required to be enhanced upwardly. In our opinion, keeping in mind the design and desideratum of the provisions of section 23 of the Act and the facts and circumstances emerging from the record of the present case and the aforesaid comparable reliable documentary evidence, the appellants-claimants are found entitled to an amount of Rs. 42. 00 per sq. mtr. instead of the amount determined by the reference court. 42. 00 per sq. mtr. instead of the amount determined by the reference court. Therefore, the appeals covered under group 4 are required to be allowed, partly, whereas the appeals covered under group 1, 2 and 3 preferred by the acquiring body and the acquisition authority are required to be dismissed. ( 25 ) CONSEQUENTLY, appeal covered under group 4, i. e. First Appeal Nos. 1880 to 1890 of 2000 and 2688 of 2000 are partly, allowed to the aforesaid extent and the appellants-claimants are granted an amount of Rs. 42. 00 per sq. mtr. with resultant other statutory benefits in respect of the lands acquired, with costs. Appeals covered under group 1, 2, 3, i. e. First Appeals Nos. 682 to 694 of 2000, 1396 to 1418 of 2001 and 421 to 439 of 2001 shall stand dismissed. ( 26 ) OUR attention was invited that the acquiring body or the acquisition body have not paid or deposited the amount of compensation even as per the impugned awards under section 18 of the act. Therefore, they are directed to deposit before the reference Court the amount due and payable including the statutory benefits within a period of four months. .