JUDGMENT Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.:-This judgment shall dispose of 12 Regular First Appeals bearing RFA Nos. 4500 to 4511 of 2001, as common questions of law and fact are involved therein. 2. Tersely, the land measuring 6 kanals 18 marla was notified under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) published on 08.7.1986 and 52 kanals 12 marlas was notified under Section 4 of the Act, published in the Govt. Gazette on 07.2.1987,situated in village Kullarpur, Hadbast No. 309, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala, followed by a notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act, published in the Govt. Gazettes dated 16.2.1987 and 14.3.1987, for a public purpose, namely for the construction of link road from village Kullarpur to village Ferozepur. 3. The Land Acquisition Collector, P.W.D. (B&R),Branch Ambala Cantt,(for short, the Collector) announced his award No.58 dated 11.11.1987 for the year 1987-88, classifying the acquired land into four categories and awarded compensation for Chahi @ Rs.32,320/- per acre; Barani @ Rs.21,547/- per acre; Banjar @ Rs.10,774/- and Gair Mumkin @ Rs.5,387/- per acre. 4. The landowners /claimants remained unsatisfied with the award of the Collector ,therefore, they preferred objections under Section 18 of the Act, in which it was averred that market value of the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, was not less than Rs.1,50,000/- per acre. It was further asserted that the potential value of the acquired land has not been taken into consideration by the Collector as it is situated near the abadi of the village and had great potential for being used for residential purposes. 5. The claim of the landowners/claimants was contested by the State of Haryana-respondent. It was alleged that just and adequate compensation has already been granted to the landowners. 6. The claimants/landowners examined two witnesses, namely Karam Singh as PW-1 and Surjit Singh Halqa Patwari as PW-2. Surjit Singh (PW2) has proved site plans Ex.P1, Ex. P-2 and Ex P-4 showing location of certain khasra numbers. Karam Singh (PW1) deposed that 13 marlas of land belonging to him was acquired. According to him, value of the acquired land at the time of acquisition was Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre as it was situated near the village. Surjit Singh (PW2) has proved site plans Ex.P1, Ex. P-2 and Ex P-4 showing location of certain khasra numbers. Karam Singh (PW1) deposed that 13 marlas of land belonging to him was acquired. According to him, value of the acquired land at the time of acquisition was Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre as it was situated near the village. On the other hand, State of Haryana examined Dev Dutt as RW-1, who deposed that the acquired land was purely agricultural and it’s market value was Rs.31,000/- per acre. Besides oral evidence, the following sale deeds were also produced:- Exhibits Nature of Date of Transaction Sale Consideration Area of Document Rs. Land P-3 Sale Deed 25.8.1986 11,000/- 10 Marlas PX Sale Deed 11.9.1981 9,000/- 10 Marlas PY Sale Deed 25.8.1986 11,000/- 10 Marlas PL Sale Deed 11.7.1994 25,000/- 10 Marlas PN Sale Deed 10.9.1993 1,91,875/- 7 Marlas R1 Sale Deed 31.12.1985 38,625/- 20K- 12 Marla R-2 Sale Deed 31.12.1985 43,500/- 23K- 4 Marlas 7. While appreciating the sale deeds brought on record, the learned Reference Court has held that so far as the sale deeds Exs.PL and PN are concerned, these are post notification sale deeds and cannot be taken into consideration. The sale deeds Exs. P-3, PX and PY, were not relied upon on the ground that they pertain to small pieces of land. Sale deeds tendered by the learned State Counsel Exs. R-1 and R-2 were also ignored on the ground that if the same are read in conjunction with copy of jamabandi Ex.PC, they would reveal that the vendors were not cultivators of the land and the same was under cultivation by the tenants. Thus, it was observed by the learned Reference Court that it is a matter of common knowledge that the land under cultivation of a tenant often does not carry optimum market value because of the fact that the vendee in such transaction only gets constructive possession whereas actual possession remains with the tenant who enjoys the real fruits of the land. 8. After discussing the documentary evidence on record, the learned Reference Court observed that there is ample evidence on record proving that the acquired land was located near the village abadi and as such had acquired potential for being used for residential purposes. 8. After discussing the documentary evidence on record, the learned Reference Court observed that there is ample evidence on record proving that the acquired land was located near the village abadi and as such had acquired potential for being used for residential purposes. It was also observed that this aspect of the matter has been ignored by the Collector keeping in view the increasing trend in the value of small pieces of land as manifested by the sale deeds Exs. PX,P-Y and PZ, the Reference Court granted 45% extra amount comprising 25% for closeness to village abadi and 20% due to closeness to Naraingarh town and the market value of the acquired land was assessed @ Rs. 46,875/- per acre. 9. Mr.B.S.Guliani, learned counsel for the appellants contended that the learned Reference Court has erred in appreciating the evidence insofar as sale deeds Ex.P-3 and P-Y are concerned as the same are dated 25.8.1986 pertaining to village Kullarpur itself where 10 marlas of land has been sold for Rs.11,000/- which comes to Rs. 1,76,000/- per acre. Learned counsel further argued that the total acquired land is 52 kanals 12 marlas, which is not such a big chunk of land for which the above sale deed cannot be set up as an example. Learned counsel for the appellants thus prayed that the appellants should be awarded the compensation @ Rs.1,76,000/- per acres on the basis of sale deeds Exs. P-3 and P-Y as on the date when notification under Section 4 of the Act, was issued. 10. As against this, Mr.H.S.Hooda, learned A.G.Haryana, assisted by Mr.Rajiv Kawatra, learned Sr. D.A.G,Haryana, has vehemently argued that the learned Reference Court has also erred in not appreciating the true import of sale deeds Exs. R-1 and R-2 pertaining to the same village . It is submitted by him that sale deed Ex. R-1 is dated 31.12.1985 vide which 20 kanals 12 marlas of land was sold for Rs. 38,625/- which comes to Rs.15,000/- per acre. Similarly, sale deed Ex.R-2 is dated 31.12.1985 vide which 23 kanals 4 marlas of land was sold for Rs.43,500/- which comes to Rs.15,000/- per acre. It is submitted by him that sale deed Ex. R-1 is dated 31.12.1985 vide which 20 kanals 12 marlas of land was sold for Rs. 38,625/- which comes to Rs.15,000/- per acre. Similarly, sale deed Ex.R-2 is dated 31.12.1985 vide which 23 kanals 4 marlas of land was sold for Rs.43,500/- which comes to Rs.15,000/- per acre. Learned counsel submitted that the compensation should have been awarded on the basis of these two sale deeds but these facts have been ignored by the learned Reference Court on the ground that the land in these sale deeds was cultivated by the tenants, therefore, the same does not carry optimum market value because in that transaction, the vendee only would get constructive possession and the actual possession remains with the tenants. 11. It is further submitted by the State Counsel that the sale deeds Ex.P-3 and PY pertain to small pieces of land of 10 marlas each, which cannot be set up as an example vis-a-vis the acquired land measuring 52 kanals12 marlas and in case, this Court relies upon these sale deeds Exs. P-3 and PY, then appropriate cut of 50% should be applied in respect of these sale deed. 12. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance and have given my thoughtful consideration to their rival contentions. 13. Insofar as the sale deeds Exs. R-1 and R-2 are concerned, these have to be ignored though on different pretext because these sale deeds carry the value of Rs.15,000/- per acre which is less than the award of the Collector who has awarded Rs.32,320/- per acre for Chahi land, Rs.21,547/- per acre for Barani. 14. Now coming to sale deeds Ex. P-3 and PY, it is admitted that these sale deeds pertain to the same village and are prior to the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. It is also admitted that the amount of Rs. 1,76,000/- per acre is determined out of these sale deeds. 15. Now coming to the point as to what appropriate cut should be applied in respect of these two sale deeds. 16. I do not agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents-State that in such a case, cut of 50% should be applied. 1,76,000/- per acre is determined out of these sale deeds. 15. Now coming to the point as to what appropriate cut should be applied in respect of these two sale deeds. 16. I do not agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents-State that in such a case, cut of 50% should be applied. I am of the view that it would be just and expedient to apply a cut of 30% for the value of the two sale deeds i.e. Ex.P-3 and PY which comes to Rs.1,23,200/- per acre. Thus, award of the learned Addl. District Judge, Ambala, dated 23.10.2000, is set aside and the claimants/landowners are held entitled to the amount of Rs.1,23,200/- per acre instead of Rs. 46,875/- per acre. In view of the above, the appeals filed by the claimants/landowners are allowed and they are held entitled to the amount of Rs.1,23,200/- per acre instead of Rs. 46,875/- per acre with all statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of amended Act along-with costs of the petitions. --------------------