JUDGMENT D. DASH, J. : The appellant in this appeal has challenged the award passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kamakhyanagar, in L.A. Misc. Case No.57 of 1996 in reference of under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act has been closed in question by this appellant in this appeal as under :- 2.Facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are as under :- Land measuring Ac. 1.52 decimal of Sarad dofasal-I, Sarad-I and Jalasaya-2 kisam of land of village Badajhara belonging to the respondents has been acquired vide notification under Section 4 of the Act dated 19.12.1990 published in Gazette on 21.12.1990. It is worthwhile to mention here that the Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Collector, Dhenkanal has fixed the market value of the land of Sarad-dofasal-I category at Rs.28,500/- per acre, Sarad-I at Rs.25,000/- per acre and Jalasaya-2 at Rs.11,700/- per acre. In this way, he had assessed the market price of the land at Rs.37928/- and for trees a sum of Rs.215/- has been awarded which the respondent received on protest and sought for reference. The referral Court has determined the market price of the land @ Rs.35,000/- per acre for Sarad-I, Rs.37,000/- per acre for Sarad dofasali and Rs.15,000/- per acre for Jalasaya-2 lands. This has been done, taking into consideration the evidence adduced from the side of the respondent with regard to potentiality of the land with its similarity with land acquired under L.A. Case No.55 of 1996 covered under same notification. 3.Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the market value of the land has not been determined by the referral Court on proper appreciation of evidence and thus needs appropriate reduction and not in consonance with what has been determined in the aforesaid cases as done. 4.Learned counsel for the respondents on the contrary submits that in the particular case evidence have been tendered by the respondents with regard to the potentiality of the land and the referral Court taking into account the fact that there remains the similarity with land under L.A. Misc. Case No.55 of 1996 has committed no error in accordingly determining the market price of land and thus the same is not liable to be interfered with. 5.In the present case the respondent has examined one witness who is none other than the respondent No.8. The appellant not sent examined any witness. Case No.55 of 1996 has committed no error in accordingly determining the market price of land and thus the same is not liable to be interfered with. 5.In the present case the respondent has examined one witness who is none other than the respondent No.8. The appellant not sent examined any witness. The referral Court taking into consideration the evidence of P.W.1 and also the award passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.55 of 1996 Ext.1 has determined the market price of Sarada-1 category of land at Rs.35,000/- per acre and Jalasaya-2 category of land at Rs.15,000/- per acre and Sarada dofasali at Rs.15,000/- per acre. It is evidence of P.W.1 that the land forming the subject matter of L.A. Misc. Case No.55 of 1996 is similar to the land involved in the referral proceeding situated in one village acquired under one notification. The referral Court having analysed the evidence has come to a conclusion of that score and has determined the market price of the land at the said rate and also the value of the trees at a reasonable rate. 6.Carefully going through the evidence available on record in the absence of any evidence to counter the same and any other material surfacing to render the evidence as not acceptable, this Court find no legal justification to interfere with the award holding the same to be just and proper. For the aforesaid award passed by the referral Court is hereby confirmed. 7.Therefore, the appeals stands dismissed. Appeals dismissed.