JUDGMENT : M.R. Shah, J. As common question of law and facts arise in all these First Appeals, and all these First Appeals arise out of the common Judgement and Award passed by the learned Reference Court, they are being heard together and decided and disposed of by this common judgement and order. 2. All these appeals, under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, have been preferred by the common appellants - Special Land Acquisition Officer , challenging the common Judgement and Award passed by the learned 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana in Land Reference Case Nos.4499, 4500, 4501 and 4505 of 2003 dated 26/3/2008 (Main Land Reference Case No. 4500 of 2003), by which the learned Reference Court has partly allowed the aforesaid Land Reference Cases filed by the original claimants under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, directing the original opponents - appellants herein to pay additional compensation to the original claimants at the rate of Rs. 44 per sq.mtr. over and above the amount of compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, along with all other consequential statutory benefits. 3. That the lands in question of the original claimants, situated at village Balasar, Taluka Kadi, District Mehsana, were proposed by the State Government for acquisition, for the purpose of Narmada Canal Project, for which the Notification under section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for convenience) was published on 29/8/1997 and Notification under section 6 of the Act came to be published on 12/10/1998. That the Notices under section 9 of the Act were served upon the interested parties. That after due inquiry, the Special Land Acquisition Officer declared Award under section 11 of the Act on 20/7/1999 awarding compensation at the rate of Rs. 4.50 per sq.mtr. The applicants accepted the said amount of compensation under protest. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid Award declared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarding compensation, the claimants submitted respective References under section 18 of the Act, which were referred to the learned Reference Court being Land Reference Case - District Court, Mehsana and the same were numbered as Land Reference Case Nos. 4499 to 4506 of 2003. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid Award declared by the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarding compensation, the claimants submitted respective References under section 18 of the Act, which were referred to the learned Reference Court being Land Reference Case - District Court, Mehsana and the same were numbered as Land Reference Case Nos. 4499 to 4506 of 2003. All the Land Reference Cases were consolidated, heard, decided and disposed of by learned Reference Court by common Judgement and Award. That evidence came to be led in Land Reference Case No.4500 of 2003 which was treated as main Land Reference Case. 4. On behalf of the claimants, one Patel Popatbhai Natvarbhai - claimants of Land Reference Case No. 4500 of 2003 came to be examined at Ex.16. The claimants relied upon the previous Judgement and Award, pertaining to adjoining village i.e. village Laxmipura, produced at Ex.14 passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, by which the market value of the acquired land was determined at Rs. 40.00 per sq.mtr. 5. The claimants also produced map showing boundaries of village Balasar (village of acquired land) at Ex.15. 6. On behalf of the original opponents one Ambalal Shankerbhai Leuva was examined at Ex.19. 7. On appreciation of evidence and having held that village Balasar and village Laxmipura, both are having common boundaries and the lands of both the villages are having similar potentialities, Considering the previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court with respect to village Laxmipura, produced at Ex.14, as comparable instance and considering the difference of two years and one month between two notifications under section 4 of the Act with respect to both the lands, granting 10% price rise per year, the learned Reference Court determined the market price of the land in question at the rate of Rs. 48.40 Paise per sq.mtr. and considering the fact that the Land Acquisition Officer has awarded Rs. 4.50 Paise per sq.mtr, deducting the same learned Reference Court held that the claimants are entitled to additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 43.90 Paise per sq.mtr. with all other statutory consequential benefits. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said Judgement and Award passed by learned Reference Court, the appellants have preferred these First Appeals along with the Civil Applications therein. 8. 43.90 Paise per sq.mtr. with all other statutory consequential benefits. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said Judgement and Award passed by learned Reference Court, the appellants have preferred these First Appeals along with the Civil Applications therein. 8. Mr.Neeraj Soni, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellants has vehemently submitted that the learned Reference Court has materially erred in relying upon the Previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14 which was with respect to another village. Therefore, it is requested to allow these appeals. No further submissions have been made. 9. Heard Mr.Neeraj Soni, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellants and considered the impugned Judgement and Award passed by learned Reference Court, evidence produced on record by the learned Assistant Government Pleader as well as the previous Judgement and Award, pertaining to adjoining village i.e. village Laxmipura, produced at Ex.14 passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, by which the market value of the acquired land was determined at Rs. 40.00 per sq.mtr. and also considered the Map Ex.15 showing boundaries of village Balasar (village of acquired land). 10. It is not in dispute that the claimants heavily relied upon the previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14 which was with respect to adjoining village i.e. Laxmipura, by which the market value of the acquired land was determined at Rs. 40.00 per sq.mtr. It is not in dispute that village Laxmipura (where the comparable land is situated) and Village Balasar (where the land in question is situated), are adjoining and even the boundaries of both the lands are also adjoining to each other. On appreciation of evidence the learned Reference Court has held that the lands of both the villages are similar in fertility and therefore, it is held that the Previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14, with respect to adjoining village Laxmipura, can be considered as comparable having regards to reasonable proximity etc., and therefore, it cannot be disputed that in absence of any other evidence, previous Judgement and Award of comparable land instances can not be considered. 11. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14, with respect to adjoining village Laxmipura, can be considered as comparable having regards to reasonable proximity etc., and therefore, it cannot be disputed that in absence of any other evidence, previous Judgement and Award of comparable land instances can not be considered. 11. Under the circumstances, when the learned Reference Court, on appreciation of evidence on record, has partly allowed the Land Reference Cases and directed to pay additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 48.40 Paise per sq.mtr., considering previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14 with respect to adjoining village Laxmipura, it cannot be said that the learned Reference Court has committed any error and/or illegality and/or has awarded compensation at the higher rate, which calls for interference of this Court. 12. Even otherwise, it is not the case of the appellants that the previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14 with respect to adjoining village, relying on which the learned Reference Court has passed the impugned judgement and award, is interfered with by the higher forum. Hence also it cannot be said that the learned Reference Court has committed any error and/or illegality in relying upon the previous Judgement and Award passed by this Court in First Appeal Nos. 4195 to 4202 of 2006, produced at Ex.14 with respect to adjoining village Laxmipura. The impugned judgement and Award passed by learned Reference Court is just, legal and proper and no error much less any error of law has been committed by the learned Reference Court. 13. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all these appeals fail and deserve to be dismissed and are accordingly dismissed. Consequently, Civil Applications are also dismissed. No costs. Appeals dismissed.