JUDGMENT : This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Keonjhar as referral court in the matter of a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act under in L.A. No. 34 of 2006. The original petitioner in the referral court was one Rama Chandra Dash and he was pursuing the said proceeding through his son Prafulla Chandra Dash who was holding his power of attorney. Said Rama Chandra Dash as well as Prafulla Chandra Dash being dead, three sons of Prafualla Dash have now been impleaded as respondents. 2. Facts necessary for the purpose of this appeal are as under:- Land under three plots bearing khata no. 65 measuring an area Ac. 1.52 decimals and also under Khata no. 66 comprising of 8 plots measuring Ac. 2.28 decimals in village Ghutukeswari have been acquired under Gazette Notification dated 24.07.1995 for the purpose of development of Daitari-Banspani Rail Link, Keonjhar. The lands are of Sarada-1, Sarada-2 and Sarada-3 varieties. The Land Acquisition Officer assessed the compensation for the said acquired land @ of Rs.20,000/-and Rs.18,000/-per acre in respect of the Sarada-1, Sarada-2 and Sarada-3 varieties of land respectively. Accordingly, for the land covered under Khata No. 65, the compensation has been determined at Rs.28,000/-and the land under Khata no. 66, the compensation has been computed at Rs.45,040/-. The original petitioner being dissatisfied that the aforesaid assessment of compensation for his land so acquired sought for the reference. The referral court on the basis of the evidence on record has finally determined the compensation payable to the petitioner for all such varieties of lands in total measuring Ac. 3.80 decimals @ of Rs.440/-per decimals and accordingly has directed for payment of the same together with the statutory benefits as available under the Act for the purpose. This determination of compensation by the referral court now been called in question. 3. Heard the learned Additional Standing Counsel and learned counsel for the substituted respondents. Perused the impugned order and other materials available on record. 4. The petitioner had advanced his claim that the compensation amount should be twice the amount as assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer for the purpose. It is his evidence that the market value of the land as it was prevailing on the date of notification was of Rs. 2,500/-per decimal. 4. The petitioner had advanced his claim that the compensation amount should be twice the amount as assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer for the purpose. It is his evidence that the market value of the land as it was prevailing on the date of notification was of Rs. 2,500/-per decimal. This has not been accepted by the referral court and is found to have rightly so done as it is contradicts the stand taken by the petitioner. The petitioner had proved two sale-deeds, Ext. 1 and 2 of the year 1992, wherein the price of the land so sold finds mention at Rs. 20,000/-for Ac. 0.07 decimals of lands. It is found that the assessment of compensation was initially made by the land acquisition officer, @ of Rs.37,200/-, Rs.35,960/- and Rs.35,960/-for Sarada -1, Sarada-2 and Sarada-3 varieties of lands. It was so assessed taking into account the annual yield of the lands and then. However, on the basis of the suggestion of the higher authority, it was again fixed basing upon the sales statistics. Taking all these into consideration, the referral court has finally determined the compensation payable to the petitioner for his lands acquired @ of Rs. 44,000/-per acre. It is there in the evidence that the lands in question is at a short distance from the township of Keonjhar. The referral court is found to have made meticulous examination of the evidence on record has determined the compensation. The challenge to the same here is in a general manner without pointing out any such infirmity in the matter of appreciation of the evidence by the referral court. It is argued from the side of the respondents that the determination of compensation is just and proper. Giving a careful reading to the award as also going through materials on record, this Court finds no justifiable reason to interfere that the above determination of compensation made by the referral court so as to interfere with the same. Therefore, the award passed by the referral court as above is hereby confirmed. Before parting at this stage, it is further made clear that here on the basis of the affidavit filed by the three grandsons of the original petitioner, they have been substituted as respondents and have been heard through their learned counsel in this appeal. Therefore, the award passed by the referral court as above is hereby confirmed. Before parting at this stage, it is further made clear that here on the basis of the affidavit filed by the three grandsons of the original petitioner, they have been substituted as respondents and have been heard through their learned counsel in this appeal. But as it has not been stated in the affidavit that except these substituted respondents, Rama Chandra Dash had no other legal heirs so as to have their entitlement over the awarded amount, the disbursal of the compensation as above would be made to these respondents subject to the satisfaction that no other legal heirs of Rama Chandra Dash are there and in case it is found that other legal heirs are there, the disbursal would be to all the legal heirs as per their entitlement in accordance with law calling upon the substituted respondents to produce all required evidence for facilitation of said disbursed amount to these substituted respondents and other legal representatives of Rama Chandra, if any as per their entitlement. 5. In the result, the appeal stands dismissed. In the facts and circumstances, no order as to cost.