JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. 1. The instant appeal stands directed against the impugned award recorded by the Reference Court in Land Reference No. 11-S/4 of 2007 whereby the learned Reference Court assessed compensation qua the lands of the land owner in the manner as stands reflected therein. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has placed on record a judgment recorded by this Court in RFA No. 44 of 2009, verdict whereof stands submitted by him to arise from an award recorded by the learned Reference Court qua a notification analogous inter se the land owners therein vis.a.vis the respondent land owner herein besides he submits qua thereupon an award common to the lands of the land owners in RFA No. 44 of 2009 vis.a.vis the respondent land owner herein standing pronounced by the Land Acquisition Collector concerned, lastly he contends qua the learned Reference Court pronouncing a common award inter se the land owners therein vis.a.vis respondent land owners herein whereupon he contends qua the verdict recorded in RFA No. 44 of 2009 while holding attraction with aplomb here at warrants its standing revered by this Court. The aforesaid submission warrants its standing countenanced by this Court conspicuously with this Court, while standing seized of RFA No. 44 of 2009 which stood preferred here before by the land owners against the award pronounced by the learned Reference Court qua the lands of the appellants therein whose lands alike the land of the respondent herein stood acquired under a common notification also when thereupon a common award stood pronounced by the Land Acquisition Collector concerned besides when the learned Reference Court pronounced a common verdict on the apposite reference petitions constituted there before by the aggrieved land owners wherefrom amongst RFA No 44 of 2009 arose. As a corollary, with this Court while adjudicating RFA No. 44 of 2009 it enhancing compensation amount vis.a.vis. land owners therein in a sum higher than the sum which stood assessed as compensation by the learned Reference Court thereupon with conclusivity standing fastened qua the verdict recorded by this Court in RFA No. 44 of 2009 also thereupon the respondent herein, hence stands entitled to assessment of compensation qua his acquired lands at par therewith. land owners therein in a sum higher than the sum which stood assessed as compensation by the learned Reference Court thereupon with conclusivity standing fastened qua the verdict recorded by this Court in RFA No. 44 of 2009 also thereupon the respondent herein, hence stands entitled to assessment of compensation qua his acquired lands at par therewith. Even if the respondent herein has not preferred cross-objection here before against the impugned award of the learned Reference Court nonetheless with the provisions of Order XLI, Rule 33 of the CPC clothing this Court with a plenary jurisdiction to pass or make such further and other decree or order as the case may require. In sequel thereof with the provisions engrafted in Order XLI, Rule 33 of the CPC vesting jurisdiction in this Court to, even in the absence of any of the respondents in the memo of parties here before omitting to file any cross appeal or cross-objections ventilating therein their grievance against the award impugned here before at the instance of the State, make an equitable befitting just pronouncement, inconsonance therewith this Court for bringing parity inter-se the pronouncement recorded by this Court in RFA No. 44 of 2009 qua the compensation amount assessed thereunder qua the land owners therein vis.a.vis the land of the respondent herein, lands whereof stood subjected to acquisition under a notification common to the appellants therein vis.a.vis the respondent herein, hence proceeds to alike the compensation amount assessed thereunder compute the aforesaid sum of money as compensation amount qua the lands of the respondent herein especially when hence parity inter-se the lands brought to acquisition under a notification analogous qua each stands begotten also when thereupon would stand assessed a just, reasonable and fair compensation amount vis.a.vis the land of the respondent herein whereupon the salutary purpose behind the engrafting of the afore stated provision in Order XLI, Rule 33 of the CPC would stand satiated. 3. 3. Be that as it may when the apposite evidence forcefully portrays the factum qua the lands of the respondent herein and the lands of the appellants in RFA No.44 of 2009 existing in close proximity to each other whereupon this Court stands prodded to form a conclusion qua the rates as stand assessed as compensation qua the lands of the appellants in RFA No. 44 of 2009 being also the computable rates of compensation assessable by this Court qua the lands of the respondent herein, whereupon parity in computation of compensation amount would occur inter-se the verdict recorded in RFA No,. 44 of 2009 vis.a.vis the verdict which stands recorded here at. Consequently, the award passed by the learned Reference Court, which stands impugned here before, stands modified in consonance with the verdict pronounced by this Court in RFA No. 44 of 2009. 4. With RFA No. 181 of 2009 which stood preferred here before by the State of Himachal Pradesh assailing there within the award of the learned Reference Court holding omnibus analogity on all relevant facets inter se the respondents therein vis.a.vis the respondent herein also when it stood adjudicated along with RFA No. 44 of 2009 besides when a perusal of the adjudication recorded therein unveils qua RFA No. 181 of 2009 standing dismissed by this Court, in sequel thereto with the rendition of the learned Reference Court as stood assailed therein holding omnibus analogity on all relevant facets vis.a.vis. the impugned rendition here at the latter ought to suffer an alike fate of its also warranting dismissal. In sequel, the impugned award stands modified to the extent above.