ORDER Viney Mittal, J. - This order shall dispose of R.F.A. Nos. 1229, 1230, 1231 and 1232 of 1984. Vide notification dated May 23, 1978 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), land measuring 7-08 acres situated in Village Sonda, Tehsil and District Ambala was intended to be acquired. After the acquisition of the land award dated August 25, 1978 was passed by the learned Land Acquisition Collector. Vide the aforesaid award an amount of Rs. 15,000/- per acre was awarded for the Chahi land, whereas Rs. 10,080/- per acre were awarded as market price for Barani/Gair Mumkin Rasta land. The claimants-land owners felt dissatisfied. They claimed a reference for further enhancement of the market price. The matter was accordingly referred. 2. The learned Additional District Judge, Ambala has now passed an award dated March 7, 1984, whereby reference had been allowed and an uniform rate of Rs. 30,000/- per acre had been assessed at the market rate of the acquired land. The land owners had been further held entitled to solatium on the enhanced amount of compensation along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of taking over of the possession of the land till actual payment. 3. State of Haryana felt aggrieved and filed the present appeals. 4. I have heard Shri Girish Agnihotri, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana and with his assistance have gone through the record of the case. 5. It is not in dispute that the learned Additional District Judge while passing the impugned award had merely relied upon the earlier award dated December 21, 1983 rendered in the case of Jang Bahadur etc. v. Haryana State, whereby land situated in several villages including Village Sonda was acquired by the State Government vide notification dated March 7, 1978. The purpose of acquisition of the aforesaid land was also similar to the one for which the land in question had been acquired in the present cases. In the aforesaid Jang Bahadurs case, the learned Additional District Judge had awarded an amount of Rs. 30,000/- per acre. On the basis of the aforesaid award and also finding that the land in question was similarly situated as the land in the earlier reference in Jang Bahadurs case (supra), the amount of Rs. 30,000/- was assessed. 6. In the aforesaid Jang Bahadurs case, the learned Additional District Judge had awarded an amount of Rs. 30,000/- per acre. On the basis of the aforesaid award and also finding that the land in question was similarly situated as the land in the earlier reference in Jang Bahadurs case (supra), the amount of Rs. 30,000/- was assessed. 6. Nothing has been shown that the findings arrived at by the learned Additional District Judge are, in any manner, erroneous or are contrary to the record. It has not been in dispute that the land which was acquired in the earlier reference in Jang Bahadurs case (supra) was, in any manner, distinct or different from the one acquired in the present cases. 7. It may be further relevant to notice here that even after the enhancement, the claimants-owners will be entitled to the enhanced amount of Rs. 11,827.50 in R.F.A. No. 1229 of 1984, Rs. 7,345.50 in R.F.A. No. 1230 of 1984, Rs. 1,952/- in R.F.A. No. 1231 of 1984 and Rs. 11,703/- in R.F.A. No. 1237 of 1984. The aforesaid enhancement at any standard cannot be said to be excessive. 8. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the cases and the findings arrived at by the learned Additional District Judge, I do not find any merit in the present appeals. The same are accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that besides the aforesaid compensation as allowed by the learned Additional District Judge, the land owners shall also be entitled to the statutory benefits under the Act. Appeals dismissed.