JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. The instant appeal stands directed by the aggrieved landowner/appellant herein against the pronouncement recorded by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu, on 15.01.2011 in Reference Petition No. 35 of 2009, whereby, he declined to the petitioner/appellant herein compensation for loss of earnings derived by the landowner from “Palsra Joinery Workshop”, workshop whereof was in operation at the time contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification for its acquisition also the petitioner/appellant herein stands aggrieved by the learned Reference Court declining to him compensation arising from loss of rental earnings accruing to him from “Sharya Paying Guest House” earnings whereof also stood reared by the appellant herein at the time contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification for its acquisition. Lastly, the appellant herein stands aggrieved by the learned Reference Court in not meteing vis-a-vis his house brought to acquisition a 40% increase from its valuation carried out by the valuer concerned, whereas vis-avis other houses brought to acquisition under a notification common inter se them vis-a-vis the house of the landowners here at a 40% hike stood meted by the learned Reference Court upon the apposite valuation carried with respect thereto by the valuer concerned. 2. Under a notification bearing No. P.B.W./B/A (7) 1- 64/04 of 2.4.2005 issued under Section 4 of the Act, qua the land/properties of various landowners, they stood subjected to initiation of acquisition proceedings for theirs standing brought to acquisition. 2. Under a notification bearing No. P.B.W./B/A (7) 1- 64/04 of 2.4.2005 issued under Section 4 of the Act, qua the land/properties of various landowners, they stood subjected to initiation of acquisition proceedings for theirs standing brought to acquisition. An order existing at page No.208 of the file of the learned Reference Court makes a disclosure therein qua the Divisional Forest Officer, Saraj Forest Division, Banjar, H.P. on 21.05.2005 renewing the validity of the property hammer mark initially issued in favour of the petitioner/appellant herein, whereupon the joinery workshop owned by him named and styled as “Palsra Joinery Workshop”, stood bestowed with an authorization to hold the relevant business of manufacturing of furniture articles besides disclosures occurring at page No. 208 on the file of the learned Reference Court qua the afore nomenclatured “Palsra Joinery Workshop” holding the relevant authorized business at the apposite stage in contemporaneity to the issuance of the apposite notification thereupon warranted the learned Reference Court to inconsonance with the mandate of Section 23 of The Land Acquisition Act, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter, to on anvil of evident loss of earnings standing encumbered upon him from his holding the hitherto authorized business of sale of furniture articles manufactured at his joinery workshop assess compensation vis-a-vis the appellant herein, yet the learned Reference Court despite the appellant herein holding the statutory empowerment for assessment of compensation standing made vis-a-vis him for loss of earnings hitherto accruing there from arising from its apposite acquisition hence standing encumbered upon him, declined to adjudge compensation on the facet aforesaid. Even though, the learned Reference Court has refused to accord relief vis-a-vis the appellant herein on facet aforesaid it yet does enjoin this Court to proceed from the relevant best evidence fathom there from his entitlement qua the quantum of compensation assessable qua him arising from loss of earnings standing encumbered upon him from his hitherto business of sale of furniture articles manufactured at his joinery shop in sequel to its along with his other lands besides property, standing subjected to acquisition. The petitioner has placed on record the statement of profit and loss for the year ending 31st March, 2006, statement whereof stands comprised in Ex.PW6/B, where within stand displayed the profits reared by him from the aforesaid “Palsra Joinery Workshop” for deprivation whereof he seeks assessment of statutory compensation in consonance with the mandate of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act. The aforesaid statement comprised in Ex.PW6/B unravels qua his earning there from a profit of Rs. 88,811/- per year. The appellant herein has thereupon proven the apposite profits derived from his afore nomenclatured joinery workshop also when has proven the balance sheet Ex.PW6/A and manufacturing and trading account statement Ex.PW6/C by his examining the chartered accountant concerned, namely, Shri Rajesh Mehra as PW-6, whereupon conspicuously when the relevant germane disclosure occurring therein remains unrebutted by the respondents herein by theirs adducing any cogent evidence for belying the relevant embodiments graphically displayed therein. Corollary whereof is qua the sum of Rs.88,811/- evidently derived as profits by the appellant herein from his relevant authorized business of his joinery workshop, workshop whereof also stood brought to acquisition rendering meteing of deference thereto. Consequently, statutory compensation assessable vis-a-vis the appellant herein arising from his standing encumbered with loss of earnings from his aforesaid joinery workshop stands computed in a sum of Rs.88,000/-. The relevant provisions of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act read as under:- “23. Consequently, statutory compensation assessable vis-a-vis the appellant herein arising from his standing encumbered with loss of earnings from his aforesaid joinery workshop stands computed in a sum of Rs.88,000/-. The relevant provisions of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act read as under:- “23. Matters to be considered in determining compensation.- (1) In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired under this Act, the Court shall take into consideration- first ; the market value of the land at the date of the publication of the [notification under Section 4, sub-section (1)]; Secondly ; the damage sustained by the person interested, by reason of the taking of any standing crops or trees which may be on the land at the time of the Collector's taking possession thereof; Thirdly ; the damage (if any), sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land by reason of severing such land from his other land; Fourthly ; the damage (if any) sustained by the person interested, at the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land, by reason of the acquisition injuriously affecting his other property, movable or immovable, in any other manner, or his earnings; Fifthly ; if, in consequence of the acquisition of the land by the Collector, the person interested is compelled to change his residence or place of business, the reasonable expenses (if any) incidental to such change, and Sixthly ; the damage (if any) bonafide resulting from diminution of the profits of the land between the time of the publication of the declaration under section 6 and the time of the Collector's taking possession of the land. ….....” 3. Likewise the petitioner/appellant herein has claimed compensation with respect to loss of earnings standing encumbered upon him from his operationalizing Sarya Paying Guest House, Sainj, loss of earnings whereof arise from the hitherto guest house also standing brought to acquisition. ….....” 3. Likewise the petitioner/appellant herein has claimed compensation with respect to loss of earnings standing encumbered upon him from his operationalizing Sarya Paying Guest House, Sainj, loss of earnings whereof arise from the hitherto guest house also standing brought to acquisition. Certificate of registration whereof as stood issued by the appropriate authority stands comprised in Ex.PW5/A. The appellant herein for succoring his claim for statutory compensation standing assessed qua loss of rental earnings standing encumbered upon him in sequel to a validly and duly registered “Sarya Paying Guest House, standing brought to acquisition, has depended upon Ex.PW1/B, an unrebutted agreement executed prior to the issuance of the apposite notification besides it holds currency from the period of its execution upto 31.05.2006 where within recitals occur of the appellant herein leasing the aforesaid guest house to the lese named therein for a lease money comprised in a sum of Rs.1,20,000/-. Consequently with Ex.PW1/B holding currency upto 31.05.2006 also with its standing executed prior to the issuance of the apposite notification whereby it stood brought to acquisition also with its currency surviving beyond the date whereat the apposite notification stood issued rendered the apposite depictions qua the rental income borne therein warranting deference standing meted thereon for thereupon computation of statutory compensation standing made vis-avis the appellant herein. In sequel, a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- as displayed therein to be the rental earnings accruing to the appellant herein stands within the ambit of Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act assessed as statutory compensation payable on its acquisition to the appellant herein. For reiteration, in aftermath, a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- is assessed as compensation in favour of the appellant herein for his standing encumbered with evident loss of rental income arising from acquisition of his guest house named and styled as “Sarya Paying Guest House”, Sainj. 4. For reiteration, in aftermath, a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- is assessed as compensation in favour of the appellant herein for his standing encumbered with evident loss of rental income arising from acquisition of his guest house named and styled as “Sarya Paying Guest House”, Sainj. 4. Lastly, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has contended with vigour qua the appellant herein standing entitled to a 40 % hike upon the valuation meted by the valuer concerned qua his house, significantly, when thereupon parity would occur vis-a-vis the compensation assessed qua houses of other landowners brought to acquisition under a notification common to them vis-a-vis the house of the appellant herein also he strengthens his contention for parity occurring in the percentum aforesaid in the valuation done by the valuer concerned inter se his house brought to acquisition vis-a-vis the house of other landowners also brought to acquisition under a notification common intra se each, by placing reliance upon a verdict of this Court pronounced in RFA No. 496 of 2011 along with other connected matters, titled as Land Acquisition Collector & Another decided on 20th June, 2015, pronouncement whereof he submits to aptly stand recorded vis-a-vis the houses of other landowners brought to acquisition under a notification common to them vis-a-vis the houses of the appellant herein whereupon this Court had proceeded to mete a 40% hike upon the apposite valuation carried by the valuer concerned qua houses of the landowners therein. The aforesaid submission addressed before this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant herein is merit worthy, hence, it stands accepted, conspicuously when it would bring parity inter se the hike of 40% meted by this Court upon the valuations by the valuer concerned qua the houses of the respondents therein, houses whereof stand submitted by the counsel for the appellant herein to stand subjected to acquisition under a notification common inter se them vis-a-vis the house of the appellant herein. 5. The above discussion unfolds the fact that the conclusions as arrived by the learned Reference Court are not based upon a proper and mature appreciation of evidence on record. While rendering the findings, the learned trial Court has excluded germane and apposite material from consideration. 6. In view of above discussion, the instant appeal is allowed. 5. The above discussion unfolds the fact that the conclusions as arrived by the learned Reference Court are not based upon a proper and mature appreciation of evidence on record. While rendering the findings, the learned trial Court has excluded germane and apposite material from consideration. 6. In view of above discussion, the instant appeal is allowed. Compensation on account of loss of earnings vis-a-vis “Palsra Joinery Workshop” of the appellant as stood brought to acquisition is assessed at Rs.88,000/- (Rs. Eighty Eight thousand only), compensation vis-a-vis the appellant herein arising from loss of rental income accruing to him from Sarya Paying Guest House, Sainj on its standing brought to acquisition is assessed at Rs. 1,20,000/- (Rs. One lac and twenty thousand). The appellant herein is also entitled to a 40% hike upon the apposite valuation of his house carried by the valuer concerned. The aforesaid amounts payable to the appellant herein shall carry all the statutory benefits. In sequel, the award impugned here at is quashed and set aside. All pending applications also stand disposed of. No order as to costs. Records be sent back forthwith.