Devinder Gupta ( 1 ) THESE two appeals filed under Section 54 of die Land acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as the Act), have been preferred by the claimants seeking further enhancement in the amount of compensation. ( 2 ). The land of the claimants situated in the revenue estate of TIGRI, Delhi was notified under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 13. 11. 1959 for being acquired for public purpose at public expense, for which declaration under Section 6 was made on 6. 11. 1968. Two separate awards were made by the Collector; namely Award No. 34-A/73-74 dated 30. 6. 1977 and Award No. 34-B/73-74 dated 12. 11. 1979, offering compensation to the claimants by fixing the market value at Rs. 1,700/- per bigha. Claimants felt dissatisfied and sought Reference under Section 18 of the Act, which was decided by the Reference Court separately. By the impugned award dated 24. 7. 1984 in L. A. C. No. 79/1977, reference was answered holding that the claimant had been adequately compensated. RFA 79/1985 is against the said award. The second reference was answered on 29. 8. 1986 holding that the fair market value of the land situate in TIGRI at Rs. 3,000/- per bigha, against the said award. RFA No. 609/1987 is against the said award. ( 3 ). The claimants in both the appeals have prayed that they be awarded compensation at market value of Rs. 10,000/- per bigha. ( 4 ). Learned Counsel for the appellant by placing reliance on various decisions of this Court contends that this Court has already determined fair market value of land situated within the estate of Mehrauli and Lado Sarai at Rs. 10,000/- and Rs. 12,000/- per bigha, wherein the land was also acquired under the same notification issued on 13. 11. 1959 has drawn our attention to the topography of the revenue estate of TIGRI. It is located just adjacent to the revenue estate of Khanpur. The lands acquired in Tigri were located by the side of Mehrauli-Badarpur Road next to village Khanpur towards its east. There is evidence on record that Village TIGRI was surrounded by the lands of villages Khanpur, Tughlakabad and was located on Mehrauli-Badarpur Road. It had building potential similar to the lands of mehrauli. ( 5 ). The lands acquired in Tigri were located by the side of Mehrauli-Badarpur Road next to village Khanpur towards its east. There is evidence on record that Village TIGRI was surrounded by the lands of villages Khanpur, Tughlakabad and was located on Mehrauli-Badarpur Road. It had building potential similar to the lands of mehrauli. ( 5 ). Considering the topography of the revenue estate and the fact that for similar acquisition which was made by the general notification issued under section 4of the Act on l3. 11. 1999, market value has already been fixed by this Court and by Supreme Court for various revenue estate at varying rates from Rs. 6,000 /- per bigha to Rs. 10,000/- per bigha. We are of the view that the claimants lands can also be considered at par by allowing minimum rates. ( 6 ). We are inclined to place reliance upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 2. 9. 1994 in RFA No. 15/1971, Union of India v. Shri Tek Ram etc. For the land situated at Khanpur acquired through notification dated 13. 11. 1959, market value was determined at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per bigha which in our view would be the fair market value for the land situated in Village TIGRI also. ( 7 ). Consequently, the appeals are allowed with costs. The claimants will be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per bigha. Over and above, the enhanced market value, the claimants will be paid solatium @ 30%, interest @ 9% for a period of one year from the date of Collector taking possession and thereafter @ 15% p. a. till payment and interest at the rate of 6% per annum under Section 4 (3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967, for a period after expiry of three years from the date of issuance of the notification under Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act, till the date the amount awarded by the Collector was deposited. The claimant will also be entitled to interest on solatium in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Sunder v. Union of India, 93 (2001) DLT 569.