JUDGMENT 1. This judgment shall govern the disposal of aforesaid appeals which are arising out of the common award passed by the Reference Court dated 7.4.2006 enhancing the amount of compensation from Rs.8,000/- per acre to Rs.15,000/- per acre. 2. It is not in dispute that the lands of various survey numbers belonging to villages Mandideep, Manddehri, Jhalarkala and Nayapura Mewati were acquired for the industrial purpose by the appellant. The first notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued on 11.2.1983 which was subsequently amended on 2.3.1983. Thereafter the objections were invited. On receiving and after decision final notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 3.7.1984. The compensations were awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer @ Rs.8,000/- per acre along with solatium 30% and interest. The reference was under section 18 of the Act which were decided by the Reference Court as per judgment dated 7.4.2006, whereby the amount of compensation has been enhanced from Rs.8,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per acre. The said enhancement relates to the land belonging to villages Mandideep, Manddehri, Nayapura Mewati and Jhalarkala. Being aggrieved by such judgment of enhancement, these appeals have been preferred. 3. Shri Vijay Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contends that the Reference Court committed error by disbelieving the statement of Sub Registrar N.P.Ahirwar and relying upon the report of the Patwari in the matter of valuation of the land. It is also contended that lands acquired were not the irrigated lands, however wrongly interpreted the statement of the Sub-Registrar while determining the average value of compensation @ Rs.15,000/- per acre and awarding the compensation accordingly. It is said that the statement of the Sub-Registrar is worthy of reliance which has been ignored, therefore the determination of the compensation @ Rs.15,000/- per acre is on higher side which is liable to be reduced maintaining the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer. It is also contended that the court on the basis of a presumption without having any material available on record determined the average value as Rs.15,000/- per acre, therefore the enhancement of compensation is liable to be set aside. 4. It is also contended that the court on the basis of a presumption without having any material available on record determined the average value as Rs.15,000/- per acre, therefore the enhancement of compensation is liable to be set aside. 4. Per contra Shri Ashok Chakraverty, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2 contends that the Reference Court has rightly determined the compensation @ Rs.15,000/- per acre relying upon the report of the Patwari which is called by the department prior to acquisition of the land. It is submitted that the statement of the Sub-Registrar is not supported by any guidelines, however, it cannot be relied upon. It is submitted by him that once two contrary reports are available while determining the compensation, the value of the land which is on higher side ought to be accepted, because those reports have been submitted by their officers. In such circumstances, it is submitted that the compensation has rightly been enhanced by the Reference Court by the impugned judgment. 5. After having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the record, it reveals that the respondents have produced the document Ex. D-1 to D-10. The document Ex.D-1 relates to village Jhalarkala of the year 1981 whereby it reveals that no sale deed has been executed in between the year 1981, 1982 and 1983. Ex D-2 and Ex.D-3 also relates to village Jhalarkala which also indicate the same thing. Ex.D-4 relates to village Mandideep of the year 1983 whereby it reveals that no registered sale deed was executed in the said year. Ex.D-5 relates to village Jhalarkala of the year 1983 which further indicates the same thing. Ex.D-6 is the document which of the year 1983 relates to village Nayapura Mewati whereby 0.10 decimal land was sold out for a consideration of Rs.5000/- by sale deed dated 11.1.1984. Ex.D-7 relates to village Manddehri of the year 1983 whereby it reveals that no sale deed has been executed. Ex.D-8 also relates to village Mandehri, whereby the sale deeds in the year 1981 of total 4 acre of land has been sold for an amount of Rs.38,000/-. Ex.D-9 is a document of the year 1982 of village Mandehri wherein no sale deed has been executed and Ex.D-10 of village Nayapura Mewati of the year 1981 indicating the fact that no sale deed has been executed. Ex.D-9 is a document of the year 1982 of village Mandehri wherein no sale deed has been executed and Ex.D-10 of village Nayapura Mewati of the year 1981 indicating the fact that no sale deed has been executed. In favour of the claimants various documents have been produced. Ex.P/1 is the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Ex.P/2 is a sale deed dated 30.10.1984 whereby 4.615 hectare of land has been purchased for an amount of Rs.4,66,950/-. The said document is not relevant because it is after the date of amended notification. As per the document Ex.P/3 i.e. the sale deed dated 3.11.1983 whereby 1.50 acre of land has been sold for an amount of Rs.31,000/- of village Mandideep. This document is relevant because it is prior to the date of acquisition, however as per this document the value comes to more than Rs.20,000/- per acre. Ex.P/4 is a sale deed dated 2.3.1983 whereby the land of 10 decimal has been purchased for an amount of Rs.10,000/-. This document is also relevant because it is prior to the date of notification. Ex.P/5 is a sale deed dated 11.1.1983 wherein also for 10 decimal, a consideration amount of Rs.5000/- has been shown. If we take note of these three documents which are relevant then as per consideration paid compensation comes to more than Rs.15,000/- per acre. The Land Acquisition Officer while determining the compensation Rs.8,000/- has called the report of the Patwari Halka as well as the Sub-Registrar. As per the report of the Patwari Halka, the average value of the land of three years was found as Rs.14,829.00 per acre while as per the report of Sub-Registrar the value was found as Rs.8,386/-. The Land Acquisition Officer relying upon the value of the Sub-Registrar determined the compensation as Rs.8,000/- per acre. The Reference Court has considered the report of the Patwari and determined the value of the land as Rs.15,000/- per acre while enhancing the amount. It is seen from the record that three documents i.e. sale deeds, Ex.P/3, P/4 and P/5 which are prior to the date of notification under section 4 of the Act if taken into consideration then the value of the land comes to more than Rs.20,000/- per acre. The Reference Court has committed error by not relying upon the sale deeds. It is seen from the record that three documents i.e. sale deeds, Ex.P/3, P/4 and P/5 which are prior to the date of notification under section 4 of the Act if taken into consideration then the value of the land comes to more than Rs.20,000/- per acre. The Reference Court has committed error by not relying upon the sale deeds. It may be explained that one of the sale deed (Ex.P/5) has not been executed in favour of the company. Thus the reasons so assigned to disbelieve the values specified in the sale deed Ex.P/3, P/4 and P/5 is unsustainable. In the opinion of this Court, it can safely be acceptable because the report of the Patwari also indicates the value of the land approximately Rs.15,000/- per acre. 6. In view of the foregoing discussion, the argument so advanced by Shri Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant placing reliance on the statement of Sub Registrar N.P.Ahirwar is devoid of any substance. The oral statement of the Sub-Registrar is not supportive of any document indicating the value of the land Rs.8000/-. 7. Considering the aforesaid, it is apparent that on the date of acquisition the value of the land was more than Rs.20,000/- per acre. In such a circumstances, if the Reference Court has determined the value Rs.15,000/- per acre relying upon the report of the Patwari which has been referred in the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, in the opinion of this Court no illegality has been committed. 8. In view of the foregoing discussions, in the opinion of this Court the Reference Court has not committed any error by enhancing the compensation for acquisition of the land from Rs.8,000/- as awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer to the sum of Rs.15,000/-. In the present appeal, no other point regarding grant of solatium and interest by the Land Acquisition Officer and the Reference Court has been challenged, however the grant of solatium and interest as directed by the Court below is hereby upheld. In the opinion of this Court, all the appeals arising out of common award are devoid of any substance, hence liable to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs.