JUDGMENT Prafulla C. Pant, J. All the above appeals, preferred under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, are directed against judgment and order dated 10-08-1990, passed .by the then learned District Judge, Pauri Garhwal, whereby amount of compensation for the acquired land has been enhanced to Rs. 15,000/- per beegha instead of Rs. 5,000/- per beegha, determined by Special Land Acquisition Officer. 2. Brief facts of the case are that total 70.92 acres of agricultural land in question was acquired for appellant-U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation, for which a notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was issued on 18-03-1987. Notification under Section 6 of the Act, was issued on 15-06-1987. The entire land is situated at Jashodharpur, at a distance of some 9-10 Kms. from the limits of Nagar Palika, Kotdwar, in the foot hills of District Pauri Garhwal. After acquisition, possession of the land was taken by the U. P. State Industrial Development Corporation on 26-11-1987. It appears that Special Land Acquisition Officer, granted compensation vide award dated 31-03-1988 to the respondents at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per beegna. Not satisfied by the same, the reference was got made by the respondents under Section 18 and 30 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, claiming compensation at the rate of Rs. 48,000/- per beegha. All the 13 references were heard together by the learned District Judge and evidence was recorded in the leading case No.1 of 1989, Girish Chandra & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr. After hearing the parties vide impugned judgment and order dated 10-08-1990, learned District Judge enhanced the compensation of land acquired, to Rs. 15,000/- per beegha instead of Rs. 5,000/- per beegha determined by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. It also provided that additional compensation on account of loss to the plants of the respondents at the rate of Rs. 200/- per beegha and in connection to the case No.1 of 1989, 7 of 1989 and 9 of 1989 and loss as to the agricultural equipment was also awarded at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- in said three cases. Besides, additional solatium at the rate of 30% on the difference of amount awarded was also given in all the thirteen cases. 15,000/- in said three cases. Besides, additional solatium at the rate of 30% on the difference of amount awarded was also given in all the thirteen cases. Interest at the rate of 12% from 18-03-1987 till 26-11-1987 (i.e. from the date of notification under Section 4 till the date of possession, was also granted on the enhanced sum. Thereafter, interest at the rate of 15% was awarded till the date of deposit of the amount of compensation. Aggrieved by the enhancement of the compensation, these appeals are preferred by the U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation before the Allahabad High Court. And all the 13 appeals were received by this court under Section 35 of U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000. 3. We heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the evidence on record. 4. . For the determination of the compensation the court has to consider the following points :- i) Quality of the land. ii) Geographical situation of the land. iii) Potentiality of land and iv) Facilities and amenities available in the area where the land is situated. For determination of valuation of land, the parties filed exemplar sale deeds before the learned lower court. On behalf of the claimants/respondents, sale deeds dated 29-08-1987 (paper no. 29-C) and sale deed dated 30-01-1988 (paper No. 13-C), were filed. On behalf of the appellant exemplar sale deeds dated 23-04-1986 and 25-06-1986 ware filed. The circle rate for the purpose of stamp duty applicable to the land in question was Rs. 5,000/- per beegha. Undoubtedly, the compensation could not have been assessed less than Rs. 5,000/- per beegha as the government itself was charging the stamp duty treating market value at that rate. However, the claimants/respondents were at liberty to establish if the market value of the land was higher than the circle rate. Exemplar sale deed dated 30-06-1988 (paper No. 13-C), shows that in the year 1988, 1.7 beegha land of some what similar nature was sold by a vendor to vendee at the rate of Rs. 48,000/- per beegha. Though this land relating to said sale deed was within the limits of village Jasodharpur but it is situated at a distance of some 3 Kms. away from the land in question. In our opinion, sale deed of land at a more distant place from the land in question is less relevant as against the sale deed nearer the land in question. away from the land in question. In our opinion, sale deed of land at a more distant place from the land in question is less relevant as against the sale deed nearer the land in question. Also, sale deed executed on a date more nearer to the date of notification of acquisition is more relevant than the sale deed executed too before or too after the acquisition. 5. Shri Sharad Sharma, learned Counsel for the appellant argued that both the exemplar sale deeds flied on behalf of the appellants were not relevant as these were not only at a distance of 3 Kms. away from the land in question, but also almost a year after the acquisition. He further submitted that after land in question was acquired for the industrial purposes, automatically value of the land increased after the date of acquisition. As such, the said exemplar sale deed cannot be treated as ideal sale deeds for the determination of the compensation. We are in agreement with the submission to the extent that the rate of compensation cannot be determined only on the basis of such sale deeds but we are of the view that if some other exemplar sale deeds are not available which pertain to the land nearer to the land in question and nearer to the date of acquisition. Some weight will have to be given to such sale deeds to come to the conclusion, as to what would have been correct market value of land in question on the date of acquisition. We feel that learned Lower Court erred in law by not taking into consideration the other exemplar sale deeds dated 23-04-1986 and 25-06-1986, flied on behalf of the appellants. Shri Rajendra Dobhal, learned Counsel for the respondents argued that the sale deeds, filed on behalf of the appellants related to the period much before the date on which the possession was taken of the land in question by the appellant. In our opinion, it is not the date of possession which is relevant but the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which is relevant for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation. That being so, the sale deeds filed on behalf of the appellant could not have been ignored. Both these sale deeds indicated market value of the land few months before the acquisition as Rs. That being so, the sale deeds filed on behalf of the appellant could not have been ignored. Both these sale deeds indicated market value of the land few months before the acquisition as Rs. 5,000/- per beegha. Therefore, instead of taking mean of two sale deeds filed on behalf of the respondents, learned Lower Court should have taken. account of all the four sale deeds for assessing correct market value of the land In question. As such Rs. (48,000 + Rs. 15,000 + Rs. 5,000 + Rs. 5,000) -;- 4 = Rs. 18,250 per beegha should have been taken as average or mean of the prices of nearby lands of similar quality and situation for correct determination of market value of smaller pieces of land, from which 25% of the value should have been deducted for calculating of the large acquired plot as against the small plots sold in the aforesaid exemplar sale deeds. Therefore, the correct amount of market value of land in question comes out to be Rs. 18,250 - (18,250 -;- 4 i.e. Rs. 4,562.5) = Rs. 13,687.5 per beegha. As to belting of land nothing is shown to us which required different rate for different parts of land acquired. No other point pressed from either side. 6. Accordingly all the 13 appeals deserve to be allowed partly to modify the impugned judgment and order to reduce the amount of compensation to the rate of Rs. 13,687.5 per beegha instead of Rs. 15,000 per beegha. All the 13 appeals are allowed partly. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the extent that the amount of compensation shall be paid to the respondents at the rate of Rs. 13,687.5 per beegha instead of Rs. 15,000 per beegha. The percentage of the interest, solatium and other additional compensation as to the plots and agricultural equipments awarded by the learned lower court shall remain the same. No order as to costs.