JUDGMENT : M.R. SHAH, J. 1. As common question of law and facts arise in these group of Appeals and all these Appeals are with respect to the compensation to be awarded for the lands acquired of same village i.e. village Khilodiya, Taluka Dhansura, District Sabarkantha, all these Appeals are decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and award passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Modasa (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Reference Court”) in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 899/2010 to 902/2010 by which the learned Reference Court has partly allowed the said References and has awarded the compensation for the lands acquired of village Khilodiya, Taluka Dhansura, District Sabarkantha for which notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued and published on 04/10/2004 the learned Reference Court has awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- sq. meter (in all Rs.157.50 per sq meter) with all other statutory benefits, which may be available under the provisions of the Act, the appellant-original opponent- Special Land Acquisition Officer has preferred First Appeal Nos. 1216/2015 to 1219/2015. 3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Reference Court, respective original claimants have preferred Cross Objection Nos. 56/2015 to 59/2015 in respective First Appeals. 4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 828/2010, 830/2010 to 833/2010 by which the learned Reference Court has determined and awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter for the lands acquired for village Khilodiya and for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published on 04/10/2004, Special Land Acquisition Officer has preferred First Appeal Nos. 1334/2015 to 1338/2015. 5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 823/2010 to 826/2010 by which the learned Reference Court has determined and awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter for the lands acquired for village Khilodiya and for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published on 04/10/2004, Special Land Acquisition Officer has preferred First Appeal Nos. 1339/2015 to 1342/2015. 6. 823/2010 to 826/2010 by which the learned Reference Court has determined and awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter for the lands acquired for village Khilodiya and for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published on 04/10/2004, Special Land Acquisition Officer has preferred First Appeal Nos. 1339/2015 to 1342/2015. 6. Original Claimants of Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 823/2010 to 826/2010 have preferred Cross Objection Nos. 81/2015 to 84/2015 in respective First Appeal Nos. 1339/2015 to 1342/2015. 7. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 818/2010 to 822/2010 by which for the lands acquired of the very village Khilodiya and for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published on 04/10/2004 the learned Reference Court has awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter (in all Rs.157.50 per sq meter), Special Land Officer has preferred First Appeal Nos. 1343/2015 to 1347/2015. 8. Original claimants of Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 818/2010 to 822/2010 have preferred Cross Objections Nos. 85/2015 to 89/2015 in respective First Appeals requesting to enhance the amount of compensation. 9. Thus, the dispute in all these Appeals is with respect to the compensation awarded for the lands acquired of village Khilodiya, Taluka Dhansura, District Sabarkantha, which was acquired for public purpose i.e. for Sujalam Sufalam Spreading Canal and for which notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published on 04/10/2004. The lands situated at village Khilodiya, Taluka Dhansura, District Sabarkantha came to be acquired for public purpose i.e. Sujalam Sufalam Spreading Canal under the provisions of the Act and notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued and published on 04/10/2004. Thereafter notification under Section 6 came to be issued and published under the provisions of the Act. Special Land Acquisition Officer declared different awards under Section 11 of the Act and determined and awarded the compensation considering the market price as on Section 4 notification at Rs.7.50 per sq meter. Thereafter notification under Section 6 came to be issued and published under the provisions of the Act. Special Land Acquisition Officer declared different awards under Section 11 of the Act and determined and awarded the compensation considering the market price as on Section 4 notification at Rs.7.50 per sq meter. The original claimants were not satisfied with the amount of compensation determined and awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer i.e. Rs.7.50 per sq meter, and at the instance of the original claimants References were made under Section 18 of the Act, which were numbered as Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 899/2010 to 902/2010 (First Appeal Nos. 1216/2015 to 1219/2015); Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 828/2010, 830/2010 to 833/2010 (First Appeal Nos. 1334/2015 to 1338/2015); Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 823/2010 to 826/2010 (First Appeal Nos. 1339/2015 to 1342/2015) and Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 818/2010 to 822/2010 (First Appeal Nos. 1343/2015 to 1347/2015). Before the learned Reference Court the original claimants relied upon the previous judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 (Exh.45) by which with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol the learned Reference Court has determined and awarded additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter. Before the learned Reference Court the original claimants also relied upon the certificate issued by the Deputy Executive Engineer (Exh.46) in support of the submissions that as the distance between village Khilodya and village Harsol is 9.50 kms, the judgment and award with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol can be said to be comparable. Relying upon its previous judgment and award in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol (Exh.45) by which with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol for which notification under Section 4 was issued and published on 12/10/2004 the learned Reference Court determined and awarded additional compensation at Rs.150/- per sq meter (in all Rs.163 per sq meter) and treating the previous judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 (Exh.45), by the impugned judgment and award the learned Reference Court has determined and awarded the compensation for the lands acquired of village Khilodiya at the rate of Rs.157.50 per sq meter (additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter) with all other statutory benefits, which may be available under the provisions of the Act. 10. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court in respective Land Acquisition Reference Cases determining the additional compensation at the rate of Rs.157.50 per sq meter with respect to the lands acquired of village Khilodiya, both the Special Land Acquisition Officer as well as the original claimants have preferred the present First Appeals as well as the respective Cross Objections. 11. Heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties at length. Perused the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court. At the outset, it is required to be noted that in the present case both the original claimants as well as the original opponent-Special Land Acquisition Officer of the State of Gujarat are aggrieved by the respective judgment and awards. 12. It is the case on behalf of the Special Land Acquisition Officer that the learned Reference Court has materially erred in awarding additional compensation at the rate of Rs. 150/- per sq meter for the lands acquired for village Khilodiya. Relying upon its previous judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol, which according to the State is at the distance of 9.50 kms away, it is the case on behalf of the original opponent- State of Gujarat and others that the learned Reference Court has materially erred in considering the judgment and award passed in Land Acquiition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 as comparable while awarding compensation for the lands acquired of village Khilodiya. 13. Even the original claimants are also aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court awarding additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter solely and mechanically relying upon its previous judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol. 13. Even the original claimants are also aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court awarding additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter solely and mechanically relying upon its previous judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol. It is the case on behalf of the original claimants that while deciding the References and awarding additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter for the lands acquired of village Khilodiya, the learned Reference Court has not at all considered and/or discussed any other evidences on record and as such there is no findings recorded by learned Reference Court with respect to whether the lands situated at village Harsol and village Khilodiya can be said to have same potentiality and/or whether the lands at village Khilodiya can be said to be more developed as contended on behalf of the original claimants, and therefore, according to the original claimants the learned Reference Court has materially erred in awarding additional compensation at the rate of Rs.150/- per sq meter only and according to the original claimants the learned Reference Court ought to have enhanced the amount of compensation above Rs.150/- per sq meter. 14. Having heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and considering the rival submissions made by the respective parties and considering the impugned judgment and awards passed by the learned Reference Court, it appears that the learned Reference Court has mechanically relied upon its previous judgment and award passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 820/2006 to 822/2006 with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol, which is admittedly at the distance of 9.50 kms. No other evidence has been discussed by the learned Reference Court. There is no other findings recorded by the learned Reference Court with respect to whether the lands situated at village Harsol and village Khilodiya can be said to be similar and/or having same potentiality and/or whether the lands at village Khilodiya can be said to be more developed as contended on behalf of the original claimants. 15. There is no other findings recorded by the learned Reference Court with respect to whether the lands situated at village Harsol and village Khilodiya can be said to be similar and/or having same potentiality and/or whether the lands at village Khilodiya can be said to be more developed as contended on behalf of the original claimants. 15. In view of the above, the present Appeals and respective Cross Objections are required to be partly allowed and matters are required to be remanded to the learned Reference Court to decide and dispose of the References afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits and the learned Reference Court to give the findings on appreciation of evidence on record and considering the aforesaid aspects by determining the market price of the lands acquired prevailing at the time of Section 4 notification. 16. In view of the above, all these Appeals and the respective Cross Objections are partly allowed. The Impugned judgment and awards passed in Land Acquisition Reference Case Nos. 899/2010 to 902/2010, 828/2010, 830/2010 to 833/2010, 823/2010 to 826/2010 and 818/2010 to 822/2010 are hereby quashed and set aside and the matters are remanded to the learned Reference Court to decide the respective References afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits and on the basis of the evidence already led and the learned Reference Court to give specific findings on the aforesaid on appreciation of evidence already on record. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of the order. It is made clear that we have quashed and set aside the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Reference Court on the aforesaid ground alone and we have not expressed anything on merits, more particularly, original claimants are entitled to what amount of compensation. The learned Reference Court to decide and dispose to the References in accordance with law and on its own merits and after discussing the evidence already on record and as observed hereinabove, the learned Reference Court shall give the specific findings on appreciating the entire evidence on record and shall determine the market price from the date on which the Section 4 notification was issued. The learned Reference Court can consider its previous judgment and award with respect to the adjacent village and/or of the same village and even with respect to the lands acquired of village Harsol and for that also while relying upon the previous judgment and award with respect to the adjacent village and/or village Harsol, which is 9.50 kms away, the learned Reference Court is also required to consider and compare the potentiality of the lands of the respective villages. However, the same is required to be considered while appreciating other evidences on record. All these First Appeals and the respective Cross Objections are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. 17. Registry is directed to send the writ of this order to the learned Reference Court forthwith.