Judgment :- This appeal has been directed against the Judgment and Decree, dated 111. 1995 made in L.A.O.P.No.14 of 1994 on the file of the Land Acquisition Tribunal/Additional Sub-court, Salem. 2. It is an admitted fact that an extent of 0.98 acres of un-irrigated dry land in S.No.11/9B in Nallikalpatti village belonged to the first respondent Pachiammal and an extent of 0.49 acres of un-irrigated dry land in the same survey number and village belonged to the second respondent Pavayammal were acquired by the Special Tahsildar (ADW), Salem for providing house sites to Adi Dravidars. For the aforesaid land acquisition proceedings, Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the official Gazette on 06.05.1992. After enquiry, the appellant/Land Acquisition Officer had fixed the market value of the land at Rs.37,843/- per acre. The respondents received the amount of compensation under protest and at their request, the matter was referred under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. 3. Before the Land Acquisition Tribunal, C.W.1 and C.W.2 were examined and a certified copy of the sale deed, dated 22.02.1990, relating to a sale of an extent of 2917 sq.ft in S.No.12/1 was marked as Ex.C.1. On the side of the respondent, no witness was examined, however, the award passed by the appellant was marked as Ex.R.1, apart from the certified copy of the sales statistics relating to the village, Ex.R.2 and combined topo-sketch of the village as Ex.R.3. 4. Considering the oral and documentary evidence and also the arguments advanced by both sides, the Court below has fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3.50/- per sq.ft and directed the appellant to pay compensation with 12% additional amount, 30% solatium and interest, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. Aggrieved by which, this appeal has been preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer. 5. Mr. V. Ravi, learned Special Government Pleader (AS) appearing for the appellant vehemently contended that the Tribunal, without considering the sales statistics and other documents has fixed the market value of the land at Rs.5/- per sq.ft and after deducting 1/3rd towards developmental expenses, arrived at Rs.3.50/- per sq.ft. It being an agricultural land, according to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the trial court could have decided the market value per cent or acres and not in sq.ft. 6. Per contra, Mr. It being an agricultural land, according to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the trial court could have decided the market value per cent or acres and not in sq.ft. 6. Per contra, Mr. D. Shivakumaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the appellant had taken the data sale deed, relating to S.No.118, which is far away from the acquired land, whereas, as per Ex.C.1, sale deed, two years prior to the date of 4(1) Notification, the said sale had taken place and as per the topo-sketch, Ex.R.3, Ex.C.1 land is situated immediately on the North West of the acquired land. As per Ex.C.1, 2970 sq.ft of land was sold at Rs.8,910/-on 22.02.1990, two years prior to the date of 4 (1) Notification at Rs.3/- per sq.ft. 7. As per the finding of the court below, on the date of 4(1) Notification, the value of the land could have raised to more than Rs.5/-per sq.ft. Considering the fact that the acquired land is an agricultural land and the land stated in Ex.C.1 was a developed house site, the Court below find it reasonable to deduct 1/3rd of the value in the aforesaid land towards developmental expenses, accordingly, held the market value of the acquired land at Rs.3.50/- per sq.ft and therefore, there is no error in the aforesaid calculation in fixing the market value of the land. 8. It is not in dispute that the sale relating to Ex.C.1 had taken place nearly two years prior to the date of 4(1) Notification at Rs.3/-per sq.ft. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, subsequent to the land acquisition proceedings, the value of the land became manifold due to the formation of Salem Corporation. However, the subsequent development cannot be considered for fixing the market value of the acquired land, since Ex.C.1 relates to 22.02.1990, two years prior to the date of 4(1) Notification, this Court is of the view to fix the value of the said land at Rs.4.50/-per sq.ft. However, the subsequent development cannot be considered for fixing the market value of the acquired land, since Ex.C.1 relates to 22.02.1990, two years prior to the date of 4(1) Notification, this Court is of the view to fix the value of the said land at Rs.4.50/-per sq.ft. On the date of 4(1) Notification, as the acquired land was only an agricultural dry land and the land described in Ex.C.1 was a house site, hence, it would be proper to deduct 1/3rd of the value of the land towards developmental expenses and hence, to meet the ends of justice, the market value has to be computed by calculating at Rs.3/-per sq.ft and accordingly, per cent the value has to be computed at Rs.1,306.80/- 9. It is not in dispute that the land acquired from the first respondent was 98 cents in S.No.11/9B in the aforesaid village, similarly from the second respondent, an extent of 49 cents of land has been acquired. Therefore, the respondents are entitled to get compensation at the aforesaid market vale of Rs.1,306.80/-per cent for the land acquired from them, apart from 12% additional amount from the date of 4 (1) Notification till the date of taking over possession, 30% solatium and interest at 9% for one year and 15% subsequent interest, as per Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. 10. This appeal is disposed of with the above observations. No costs.