ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. The only question that arises in the present appeals is the correct quantum of compensation that should be awarded to the appellants – landowners for acquisition of land totally measuring 4 Acres and 23 guntas covered by the notification dated th July, 2000 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”). The notification/declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued/published on 11th October, 2001 and by the award dated 4th February, 2002 compensation at the rate of Rs.96,000/- per acre had been granted to the landowners. In the reference made under Section 18 of the Act, the Civil Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.23,78,360/- per acre which compensation on appeal filed by the State was reduced by the High Court to Rs.9,00,000/- per acre. Aggrieved, the landowners have filed the present appeals. 3. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 4. Notwithstanding the very elaborate judgment of the High Court and the several exhibits which have received consideration the matter lies within a very short compass. 5. The landowners relied on Exhibits 29 and 31 which are the award passed by the Reference Court and the modified award in appeal passed by the High Court in respect of lands claimed to be similar to the acquired lands. In the order in Appeal, the High Court rejected the reliance placed on the aforesaid two exhibits by holding that the lands covered by the said awards were to the north of Bijapur city and were developed lands. In fact, they were ready residential plots. The acquired lands in the present case were located to the south of the Bijapur city and were vacant lands and the lands adjacent to the acquired lands were agricultural lands. 6. In the above situation, the High Court turned to a consideration of Exhibit P-13 i.e. a sale deed dated 21st December, 2001. The price for the land sold by Exhibit P-13 worked out to Rs.54.80 paise per sq. ft. Taking into account the fact that the land involved in Exhibit P-13 was also a residential plot in a developed layout, the High Court thought it proper to deduct development charges at the rate of 60% of the sale value of the land under acquisition which was worked out at Rs.50/- per sq. ft. ft. Taking into account the fact that the land involved in Exhibit P-13 was also a residential plot in a developed layout, the High Court thought it proper to deduct development charges at the rate of 60% of the sale value of the land under acquisition which was worked out at Rs.50/- per sq. ft. after grant of de-escalation of 10% having regard to the difference between the date of the sale covered by Exhibit P-13 and the date of the notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case. Accordingly, the market value of the acquired lands was worked out at Rs.20/- per sq. ft. and rounded off at Rs.9,00,000/- per acre. 7. The High Court in the order under challenge has recorded two significant findings which would be relevant for determination of the compensation that should be awarded in the present case. Firstly, it was held that the land had non-agricultural potential and secondly, having regard to the purpose of acquisition i.e. for construction of a Highway the price of the land was bound to increase. However, in working out the compensation payable, we do not find any reliance or reference to either of the aforesaid two findings to have been made by the High Court. Furthermore, the High Court has taken the view, on an understanding that it has been so held by this Court in the judgments referred to in the impugned order, that the developmental charges have to be between 60% to 75%. We do not see why the High Court should have carried the aforesaid impression inasmuch as time and again it has been stressed by this Court that the permissible deduction on account of developmental charges can vary from minimum of 20% to maximum of 75%. The actual rate of deduction would always depend on the facts of each case. In the present case, though the land has been found to be different from those covered by Exhibit P-29 and Exhibit P-31 and even Exhibit P-13 we do not find any conclusive finding of any forum below with regard to the state of the land covered by the acquisition process in the present case. 60% deduction on account of development charges is on the higher side which would be justified only if some evidence to sustain such a rate of deduction is available. 60% deduction on account of development charges is on the higher side which would be justified only if some evidence to sustain such a rate of deduction is available. The same is not forthcoming in the present case. That apart, some allowance ought to have been granted by the High Court having regard to the fact that the High Court itself has recorded the finding that the land had non-agricultural potential and also the value of the land was bound to increase with the acquisition made for the Highway. 8. Taking into account the aforesaid facts we are of the view that in the facts of the present case developmental charges to the extent of 40% would meet the ends of justice and that the said amount should be deducted from the sale value of the land i.e. from the price of Rs.54.80 paise per sq. ft. emanating from Exhibit P-13. In determining the aforesaid price of Rs.54.80 paise per sq. ft. we are of the view that in the present case the de-escalation of 10% ordered by the High Court should not be sustained by us in view of the proximity of the date of the notification under Section 4 of the Act i.e. 27th July, 2000 and the date of execution of sale deed (Exhibit P-13) i.e. 21st December, 2001. We order accordingly. The amount of compensation will now be reworked on the aforesaid basis. The appellants landowners shall, naturally, be entitled to all statutory benefits including additional compensation, solatium and interest for such period as awardable in law. 9. We have also noticed that by an interim order of this Court dated 28th October, 2013 payment at the rate of Rs.18 lakh per acre has been directed to be made to the appellants landowners which payment has since been made. We make it clear that on computation of the quantum of compensation as per the directions above if the amount found due to the appellants landowners is less than Rs.18 lakh per acre the said landowners will not be called upon to make any refund of such amount that they may have received pursuant to the aforesaid interim order of this Court. 10. With the aforesaid modification of the order of the High Court and the directions as above the present appeals are disposed of.