JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. Since common questions of fact and law stand raised for consideration in all the Appeals, hence they are taken up together for disposal. 2. The instant appeals stand directed against the impugned judgments rendered by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu, in the respective Reference Petitions preferred before it by the respondents herein, whereby it while interfering with the awards of the Land Acquisition Collector proceeded to assess an additional sum of 1,70,000/- in favour of Gian Chand; Rupees 6,17,987 in favour of Ail Ram; Rupees 2,71,977/- in favour of Kadshi Ram and Rupees 5,44,485/- in favour of Chet Ram as compensation towards their respective houses as stood subjected to acquisition. 3. The houses of the respondents herein stood acquired under the apposite provisions of the Land Acquisition Act for the construction of “Parbati Hydro Electric Project”. On conclusion of codal formalities, the houses of the respondents herein were concluded in the awards of the Land Acquisition Collector to hold a value of :- Rs.2,29,601/- in favour of Gian Chand. Rs. 4,42,305/- in favour of Ail Ram. Rs. 5,06,791/- in favour of Chet Ram. Rs. 2,71,091/- in favour of Kadshi Ram. 4. The respondents herein instituted Reference Petitions before the Additional District Judge, Fast Track, Kullu primarily on the score of the Land Acquisition Collector under-assessing the value of their respective houses sequelling a gross under-assessment besides a gross underpayment qua them of compensation. The learned Additional District Judge in his impugned award while interfering with the supplementary awards of the Land Acquisition Collector proceeded to assess an additional sum of 1,70,000/- in favour of Gian Chand; Rupees 6,17,987 in favour of Ail Ram; Rupees 2,71,977/- in favour of Kadshi Ram and Rupees 5,44,485/- in favour of Chet Ram as compensation to them qua their respective houses as stood subjected to acquisition. The assessment of additional sums aforesaid as compensation in favour of the respondents herein by the learned Additional District Judge while seized of the apposite Reference petitions instituted before him by the respondents herein, in its entirety depended upon emanations in the cross-examination of RW-1 (kanungo) wherein he bespoke the factum of the respective houses of the respondents herein bearing a value in the sums disclosed hereinabove. The aforesaid factum comprised in the cross-examination of RW-1 has been read in isolation vis-à-vis other apposite emanations occurring in his cross-examination, whereas it was enjoined to be read in conjunction with and in harmony with the earlier apt portion of his cross-examination wherein he has portrayed of the Land Acquisition Collector pronouncing supplementary awards anvilled upon a fresh assessment of the houses of the respondents, assessments whereof occurred in consonance with HPSR 1999. With the Land Acquisition Collector on re-assessing the value borne by the houses of the respondents which stood subjected to acquisition, his pronouncing supplementary awards in respect thereto details whereof vis-à-vis each respondent herein stood delineated in the table appended with the supplementary awards, is perse communicative of the additional sums as delineated therein standing assessed as compensation payable qua the respective houses of the respondents herein as stood subjected to acquisition besides sums earmarked therein constituting consolidated sums of money towards compensation assessed qua them. In other words sums of money reflected in the table appended with the supplementary awards pronounced by the Land Acquisition Collector encompassed both the value borne by the respective houses of the respondents herein as stood subjected to acquisition besides included therein the statutory charges imperatively to be borne thereon. With the sums aforesaid standing assessed in the supplementary awards rendered by the Land Acquisition Collector and theirs constituting compensation towards the respective houses of the respondents herein subjected to acquisition whereon preemptory statutory charges when standing not levied thereon warranted theirs standing levied or added thereon however when preemptory statutory charges stood borne on the sums of the money assessed as compensation towards the houses of the respondents herein subjected to acquisition there was hence no infirmity in the award of the Land Acquisition Collector. Contrarily it appears of the learned Additional District Judge even while overlooking besides omitting to read the supplementary awards alongwith the table appended therewith with reflections therein of houses of each of the aggrieved respondents herein as stood respectively subjected to acquisition, value whereof stood reassessed, reassessed value whereof encompassed cumulatively not only the cost/value of their respective houses but also the statutory charges levied thereon by the Land Acquisition Collector yet proceeded to impute untenable sanctity to the deposition of RW-1 on its proceeding to unwarrantedly read it fragmentarily. Moreover, It appears that RW-1 even when concedes in the earlier portion of his cross-examination of the Land Acquisition Collector in his supplementary awards on an appropriate assessment carried out qua their value underscoring therein their compensation rearing value, yet, despite the disclosure made by RW-1 in the opening portion of his cross-examination of the apposite supplementary awards standing anchored upon re-assessment of the value of the houses of the respondents reassessment whereof begetting compliance with HPSR 1999 he stood constrained to communicate in his deposition of yet additional sums in the figures alluded to hereinabove yet standing ordained to be assessed as compensation towards their respective houses. Even otherwise his oral deposition qua the factum aforesaid was discarable also it was overlookable in view of the relevant, germane and apt documentary evidence adverted to hereinabove especially when it for the reasons aforesaid had in the consolidated sums adverted to hereinabove reflects of a compensation standing assessed thereunder not only qua the respective houses of the respondents herein as stood subjected to acquisition but also the statutory charges peremptorily to be borne thereon standing added thereon. In sequel the oral testimony of RW-1 is discardable as well as unreadable. In aftermath, the assessment of the additional costs of the houses of the respondents concerned as stood subjected to acquisition and qua whereof supplementary awards stood announced with comprehensive delineation therein of compensation standing assessed qua them merits reverence. Any discarding thereof by the learned Additional District Judge concerned especially when it constituted the apt, germane evidence, sequels an inference of it hence committing a legal misdemeanor in overlooking germane and apt evidence. Contrarily when it has imputed reliance to unreadable besides discardable testimony of RW-1 it hence has compounded the magnitude of its gross misdemeanor. The summom bonum of the above discussion is of with the learned Additional District Judge having mis-appraised the relevant and germane material and of its meteing untenable reverence to discardable material, it hence committing a legal misdemeanor in coming to the conclusions encapsulated in the impugned renditions which obviously warrant interference by this Court. 5. Consequently, the instant appeals are allowed and the impugned awards rendered by the learned Additional District Judge (FTC) Kullu is/are quashed and set aside.