JUDGMENT Nirmal Yadav, J.:-All the above-mentioned regular first appeals having been arisen out of the same notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Award passed by Additional District Judge, Faridabad, dated 18.1.1989 shall stand disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The State of Haryana on 23/24th April, 1985 issued notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) intending to acquire 44.03 acres of land situated in Village Bhanakpur, Hadbast No. 45 , Tehsil Ballabhgarh for a public purpose, namely, for construction of 400 K.V. Sub-Station, Ballabhgarh of the National Thermal Power Corporation. The declaration under Section 6 of the Act was published on 26.8.1985 and the District Revenue Officer-cum-Land and the Acquisition Collector was directed to take further steps for acquisition acquisition of the land. Vide Land Award No.4, the of the Land Acquisition Collector, Faridabad awarded compensation of the entire acquired land @Rs.40,000/- per acre i.e. Rs.8.25 per square yard along with 30% solatium and 12% per annum additional amount, as envisaged under section 23(1-A) of the Act. 3. Feeling aggrieved, the claimants in all the appeals, made reference to the District Judge, Faridabad, for enhancement of compensation. According to them, the Land Acquisition Collector did not award a reasonable and adequate compensation keeping in view the market value of the land prevalent in the vicinity of the acquired land at the time of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act. The learned Additional District Judge, after taking into consideration the facts and evidence on record, enhanced the compensation to Rs.12/- per square yard along with solatium at the rate of 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation and interest @ 9% per annum for the first year and @ 15% for the subsequent years till the payment was made. The claimants were also awarded additional amount @ 12% as envisaged under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act. The claimants, as well as the State of Haryana being not satisfied with the decision of the Reference Court, have filed the aforesaid appeals. 4. The claimants in R.F.A. Nos.967, 984, 966 of 1989 have stated that though they are entitled to be awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. The claimants, as well as the State of Haryana being not satisfied with the decision of the Reference Court, have filed the aforesaid appeals. 4. The claimants in R.F.A. Nos.967, 984, 966 of 1989 have stated that though they are entitled to be awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 200/- per square yard, but as they could not afford to pay ad valorem Court fee on the said amount, therefore, they have limited their claim to a further sum of Rs. 60,000/-, which comes to Rs.30/- per square yard. Similarly, the claimants in RFA Nos.872, 873 and 914 of 1989 have prayed for enhancement of compensation to Rs.24/- per square yard for the acquired land. 5. During the pendency of these regular first appeals, the claimants filed applications under Order 41, Rule 27 CPC pleading that after rendering of the impugned Award, this Court vide its judgment dated 26.11.1993 has decided RFA No.253 of 1992 titled as State of Haryana vs. Escorts Dealers Development Association Limited together with Cross-objection No.24-C-I of 1992. The acquisition in the said case was relating to land situated in Village Mewla Maharajpur and was acquired for constructing link road from Delhi-Mathura Road to Sector 46, Faridabad­ Ballabgarh Controlled Area. This Court after considering the entire relevant material, assessed compensation at the rate of Rs.337.20 per square yard. Sector 46 adjoins Sector 21 where the land is acquired in the present case. It was further submitted that notification dated 11.12.1991 issued by the State of Haryana under Section 29(7) of the Faridabad Complex Administration (Regulation and Development) Act, 1971 together with the development plan finalized by Drawing No.FCA/SIP/91/808 dated 15.11.1991, are the most relevant documents to show the exact location of the land acquired in the present case. The claimants therefore, prayed for placing on record the aforesaid documents viz. judgment of this Court in the case of Escorts Dealers Development Association Limited (supra), notification dated 11.12.1991 and development plan, as Annexures A-1, A-2 and A-3, respectively. 6. The aforesaid application for additional evidence is contested by the respondent-National Thermal Power Corporation mainly, on the ground of delay. It is contended that judgment was rendered by Additional District Judge on 18.1.1989 and thereafter the appeals were filed in April 1989, whereas, the application for placing on record Annexures A-1 to A-3 has been filed in the year 2004 i.e. after a delay of 15 years. It is contended that judgment was rendered by Additional District Judge on 18.1.1989 and thereafter the appeals were filed in April 1989, whereas, the application for placing on record Annexures A-1 to A-3 has been filed in the year 2004 i.e. after a delay of 15 years. It is further pleaded that the documents sought to be prpduced by way of additional evidence are not even remotely connected with the subject matter of the appeal and are, therefore, not relevant to the facts of the present case. It is further contended that acquired land is located at a distance of about 25 kilometres from Sector 46. It is further submitted that there is no development in the vicinity of the power grid sub station. According to Thermal National Power Corporation, 400 KV Power Grid Sub Station is set up partly in Village Bhanakpur and partly in village Sameypur. It is not a part of Municipal Corporation, Ballabhgarh, rather it is an unclassified remote area. 7. On careful consideration of the averments made in the application and reply filed by the respondent as also the arguments raised by both the parties, this Court is of the view that judgment of this Court (Annexure A-l), notification (Annexure A-2) and site plan (Annexure A-3) would be quite relevant for the just decision of the case as these documents would be helpful in determining the location and assessing the fair market value of the acquired land. Hence, the application is allowed and documents Annexures A-I to A-3 are taken on record. 8. With regard to the market value of the acquired land, learned counsel for the appellants also referred to the judgment of this Court in the case of Bir Singh vs. State of Haryana, RFA No.2263 of 1995 decided on 13.2.2001. Learned counsel pointed that in the above-referred appeal a large chunk of land measuring 491.29 acres, falling in villages Jharsentli and Ballabhgarh, was acquired for a public purpose, namely, for development and utilization of land as industrial in Sector 58 of Faridabad­ Ballabhgarh Controlled Area, under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977. The District Judge, Faridabad, on reference, assessed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.150/- per square yard. The District Judge, Faridabad, on reference, assessed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.150/- per square yard. On filing appeal by the claimants, this enhanced the compensation to Rs.165/­ per square yard along with statutory benefits under Sections 23 (1-A) and 28 of the Act and solatium @ 30%. By making reference to development plan, Annexure A-3, learned counsel for the claimants pointed out that Village Bhanakpur is situated in the close vicinity of village Jharsentli where industrial area has been developed by the, Haryana Urban Development Authority. The land in question is, therefore, having the potentiality for commercial as well as industrial use. 9. Learned counsel for the claimants have assailed the finding of learned Additional District Judge whereby the Reference Court has partly relied upon sale deed, Ex.P6 and has thereby deducted a sum of Rs.6800/- from the total sale consideration of Rs.13,000/-, on the ground that the said amount was not paid before the Sub Registrar at the time of registration of sale deed. It is argued that sale deed, Exhibit-P6 to land situated relates in Village Bhanakpur itself and sale was effected at the rate of Rs.30/- per square yard. However, learned Additional District Judge has fell in error while excluding the sum of Rs.6800/- on the ground that the sale deed was executed and registered after about a month of publication of the notification. It is further argued that a perusal of the sale deed would show that a sum of Rs.6800/- was paid in advance, which is a normal practice in such transactions. Therefore, learned Additional District Judge has wrongly assessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.12/- per square yard in stead of Rs.30/- per square yard. 10. Learned counsel for the claimants referred to the provisions of Section 51-A of the Act to argue that a presumption with regard to genuineness of the document(s) like sale deed transactions can well be relied on, if such a presumption is not rebutted by any cogent evidence, meaning threby the certified copy of the registered document may be accepted as evidence of transaction recorded in the document. The Apex Court in the case of Land Acquisition Officer vs. V. Narasaiah, 2001(3) R.C.R. (Civil) 255 while considering the provisions of Section 51­A of the Act, has held that certified copy of the document can be accepted as evidence of the transaction recorded therein. It enables the Court to treat what is recorded in the document in respect of the transaction referred to therein, as evidence. 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the evidence on record, I am of the considered view that sale deed, Exhibit P-6 produced by the claimants would be the most relevant piece of evidence to determine the fair market value of the land acquired in the present case. The land sold vide Exhibit-P6 falls in Village Bhanakpur itself and sale was effected @ Rs.30/­ per square yard. Except the hypothetical presumption made by learned Additional District Judge, there is no other cogent evidence on record to rebut this sale instance produced by the claimants. Though the learned Additional District Judge has aptly relied on sale deed, Ex.P6 relating to village Bhanakpur, but has erred in deducting a sum of Rs.6800/- on the ground that the said amount was not paid by the vendee before the Sub Registrar. Taking into consideration the judgment in V. Narasaiah’s case (supra) as also the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Cement Corporation of India vs. Purya, 2004(8) SCC 270, the contents of the sale deed, Ex.P6, have to be considered to be genuine. Section 51-A of the Act enables the Court to accept on record a sale deed evidencing a transaction. Therefore, no further proof is required, even the vendor or vendee of the sale deed need not be examined to prove the contents of the sale deed. Moreover, no other evidence has been brought on record by the respondents to rebut the sale deed, Ex. P6. The judgment relied by the claimants in the case of Escorts Dealers Development Association Limited, (supra) does not espouse the case of the claimants in any manner, as land acquired therein is situated at a distance of about 46 kilometres from the land acquired in the present case. The site plan also shows that Sector 46 is farther away from Village Bhanakpur. 12. The site plan also shows that Sector 46 is farther away from Village Bhanakpur. 12. Insofar as potentiality of the acquired land for commercial and industrial use is concerned, revenue estate of Jharsentli adjoins the revenue estate Bhanakpur. This Court in Bir Singh’s case (supra) has determined the market value the land in Village of of Village the Jharsentli @ Rs.165/- per square yard. The land acquired in this case is situated close to the land sold vide sale deed, Ex. P6. Shri N.K. Saksena, Deputy Manager, National Thermal Power Corporation appeared as RW1. He has admitted that Thermal Power Station, Faridabad is surrounded by residential and commercial sites. He has further admitted that residential quarters are likely to be constructed in the acquired land for the staff members of their department. It is further admitted that north side of Village Jharsentli falls in the area of Faridabad Complex Administration. From claimant’s side, PW1-Nathi Ram, claimant submitted that there are factories in the area from Ballabhgarh to Bhanakpur. 13. There is no dispute that in Bir Singh’s case (supra), this Court has awarded compensation @ Rs.165/- per square yard and the land acquired therein is in the close vicinity of the land subject matter of the present appeals. However, as already stated above, sale deed, Ex. P6 is a better guiding sale instance in the present appeals as the land transacted vide this document is situated in the same very locality. Moreover, the claimants herein have themselves limited their claim to Rs.30/- per square yard. Learned counsel for the claimants have, of course, stated at the bar that market value of the acquired land be assessed at Rs.165/- per square yard by relying upon the judgment of this Court in Bir Singh’s case (supra) and claimants be allowed to make good the deficiency in Court fee. Learned counsel for the State of Haryana as well as for National Thermal Power Corporation have, however, vehemently opposed these submissions. 14. Taking into consideration that claimants have themselves claimed Rs.30/- and Rs.24/- per square yard as compensation for the acquired land and have paid the Court fee accordingly, I find no justification in permitting them to make up the deficiency in Court fee and amend their claim accordingly, at this stage. 14. Taking into consideration that claimants have themselves claimed Rs.30/- and Rs.24/- per square yard as compensation for the acquired land and have paid the Court fee accordingly, I find no justification in permitting them to make up the deficiency in Court fee and amend their claim accordingly, at this stage. It is well established that the Courts have to assess a fair reasonable and adequate market value of land on the basis of evidence adduced, the other circumstantial evidence and probabilities arising in each case. The guiding star while assessing the market value would be whether a hypothetical willing vendor would offer the land and a willing purchaser in normal human conduct would be willing to buy as a prudent man in normal market conditions in the locality in which the acquired lands are situated as on the date of the notification. Moreover, the Courts have also to take into consideration the potential evidence of rising trend of the market price of the land. 15. In view of the foregoing discussion, the appeals of the claimants are allowed and that of the State of Haryana stand dismissed. The claimants in RFA Nos.966, 967 and 984 of 1989 shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.30/- per square yard, while in RFA Nos.872, 873 and 914 of 1989 the claimants shall be of entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.24/- per square yard. The claimant shall also be entitled to all other statutory benefits as envisaged under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act. ————————