JUDGMENT & ORDER : 1. Both the aforesaid appeals have arisen out of acquisition of land under same notification and Mouja and so on the prayer of learned counsel for the parties, these appeals were heard analogously and the common judgment is passed in respect of both the appeals. 2. Heard Mr. R Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants as well as Mr. DR Choudhury, learned counsel appearing on behalf of all the respondents except the respondent, LA Collector. 3. These appeals, under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 have been preferred against the judgment dated 30.07.2015 delivered by the Land Acquisition Judge, (Court No. 3), West Tripura, Agartala in Misc. (LA) 83/2010 and Misc. (LA) 74 of 2010. By the aforesaid judgments, the land value has been increased to Rs. 15,00,000/- per kani for purpose of drawing the compensation with other statutory components for the acquired lands appertaining to Khatian No. 2064, Plot No. 6187,6173,6181,6186 and 6086 (Nal) measuring 0.65 acres [Misc. (LA) 83/2010] and Khatian No. 3155, Plot No. 6194 (Nal) measuring 0.06 acres [Misc. (LA) 74/2010]. Both the lands belonged to Mouja Indranagar and were acquired for public service, namely, ONGC Drill Site and waste pit at location KUAC under Sadar Sub Division, West Tripura District. 4. The acquisition process commenced by the Notification under No. F.9(10)-REV/ACQ/VI/2005 dated 14.12.2005 under Section 4 of the L.A. Act. The declaration under Section 6 of the L.A. Act was made under the even No. dated 21.01.2006. Thereafter, on carrying out the inquiry under Section 11 of the L. A. Act, 1894, the value of the land was decided by the L.A. Collector at Rs. 2,50,000/- per acre for the Nal class of land. 5. The land-loser respondents, being dissatisfied, urged for reference under Section 18 of the L.A. Act and accordingly, the reference was made. By the impugned judgment and award dated 30.07.2015 the said reference has been answered by enhancing the value of the land from Rs. 2,50,000/- per acre to 15,00000/- per kani for purpose of determining the compensation. 6. Mr. R. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the land loser respondents have utterly failed to prove that they were entitled to the increased rate for the said land. 7. In Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (registered) Faridkot & Ors. Vs. 2,50,000/- per acre to 15,00000/- per kani for purpose of determining the compensation. 6. Mr. R. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the land loser respondents have utterly failed to prove that they were entitled to the increased rate for the said land. 7. In Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (registered) Faridkot & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in AIR 2012 SC 2721 : (2012) 5 SCC 432 , it has been observed by the Apex Court in para-15 that if there was no exemplar pursuant to which the L. A. Judge could have arrived at the market value, then the rate is unsustainable. 8. Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has further submitted that in absence of any exemplar, the impugned judgment and award cannot be sustained. Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel has submitted that on the assessment of the appellant, it appears that at best the land loser respondents may get Rs. 5,00,000/- per kani i.e. Rs. 12.5 lakhs per acre. 9. Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel has asserted that for acquisition under the same notification, the L.A. Collector in the process of determining the compensation of Nal class of land had determined the rate at Rs.1,00,000/- per kani. 10. It appears that the L.A. Collector as well as the referring claimants brought in the evidence the following sale deeds in support of their respective claims. For the referring claimants. Sale deeds No. 1-7105 dated 21.06.2004, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 and 1-10778 dated 23.10.2006. All the sale deeds as referred above here marked as Exhibit-1 series. For the Land Acquisition Collector Sale deeds No. 1-6431 dated 25.07.2003, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003, 1-5662 dated 04.07.2003 and 1-8065 dated 09.09.2003 which were marked respectively as Exhibit-A, B, C and D series. 11. Thereafter, the L.A. Judge has made the observation, as reproduced below, to enhance the rate from Rs. 2,50,000/- per acre for Nal class of land to Rs.15,00,000/- per kani. “It appears that in the instant case the claimant petitioners have submitted three copies of sale deeds vide No. 1-7105 dated 21.06.2004, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 and 1-10778 dated 23.10.2006 which are marked as Exhibit-1 series. 2,50,000/- per acre for Nal class of land to Rs.15,00,000/- per kani. “It appears that in the instant case the claimant petitioners have submitted three copies of sale deeds vide No. 1-7105 dated 21.06.2004, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 and 1-10778 dated 23.10.2006 which are marked as Exhibit-1 series. On the other hands the O.P. No. 2 has produced four sale deeds vide No. 1-6431 dated 25.07.2003, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003, 1-5662 dated 04.07.2003 and 1-8065 dated 09.09.2003 which are marked as Exhibit-A, B, C and D series to substantiate their claim. Out of these three sale deeds produced by the referring claimant, sale deed vide No. 1-8511 dated 21.06.2004 was also considered by the L.A. Collector for assessment of compensation. But the L.A. Collector did not accept the sale deed No. 1-8511 dated 21.06.2004 because it pertains to a small piece of land which attract more buyers and fetch more price than large track of land so this cannot represent the real average prevailing market value of Bastu classes of land. But on perusal of the claim statement and the counter statement of OP No.2, that the acquired land has already developed and could be used as commercial or residential plot. Therefore, the price of the land should be assessed on the higher side not on the lower side. Because the OP NO.2 has already stated in their counter statement that the acquired land is situated at Indranagar village which is adjoining to Agartala Town and urbanization is progressing very rapidly. As a result there is strong demand for land suitable for construction of house site. It appears that in the instant case the notification was made on 14.12.2005. The deed No.1-10778 was executed on 23.10.2006 i.e. after the date of notification. So this deed cannot be taken into consideration for assessment of award. It also appears that the sale deeds which are produced by both sides for consideration of quantum of award, the consideration value of the land of deed No.1-7105 dated 21.06.2004 is on the higher side i.e. @ Rs.30,00,000/- per kani. The classification of the land is viti class. The consideration value of the land of deed No.1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 is @ Rs.20,00,000/- per kani. The classification of that land is Bastu class. The acquired land is chara class of land. It also appears that the potential value of viti and chara are almost similar. The classification of the land is viti class. The consideration value of the land of deed No.1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 is @ Rs.20,00,000/- per kani. The classification of that land is Bastu class. The acquired land is chara class of land. It also appears that the potential value of viti and chara are almost similar. However, considering various aspect it is assumed that the value of Nal and in no way be less than half of the value of viti bastu class of land. Moreover, the value of the sale deeds which are produced by both the parties with reference to similar lands in comparison with the acquired land is @ Rs. 30,00,000/- per kani is in the higher side. In a decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (registered) Faridkot & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in AIR 2012 SC 2721 , in para-15 of the decision the Hon’ble Apex Court held that: “(15) It is clear that when there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, it is the general rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied that it is a bona fide transaction, has to be considered and accepted. When the land is being compulsorily taken away from a person, he is entitled to the highest value which similar land in the locality is shown to have fetched in a bona fide transaction entered into between a willing purchaser and a willing seller near about the time of the acquisition.” Therefore, considering the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, it appears that the referring claimants is entitled to get the value of the acquired land @ Rs. 15,00,000/- per kani i.e. the 1/2 (half) of the highest value @ Rs. 30,00,000/- per kani with reference to similar land in the locality. In view of above, I am constrained to hold that the referring claimant in the present case is also entitled to get compensation 50% Rs. 30,00,000/- i.e. @ Rs. 15,00,000/- per kani for the proper value of the acquired land considering the classification of the acquired land is chara/Nal land along with other statutory benefit.” 12. Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that this case is covered by the judgment and order dated 28.07.2016 delivered in series of L.A. Appeals being L.A. Appl. No. 51 of 2013, L.A. Appl. Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that this case is covered by the judgment and order dated 28.07.2016 delivered in series of L.A. Appeals being L.A. Appl. No. 51 of 2013, L.A. Appl. No. 52 of 2013 and L.A. Appl. No. 53 of 2013. This Court has scrutinized the comparability of the location, advantage etc., with the land as relevant for the present appeal and the land in those appeals which were disposed of by the judgment and order dated 28.07.2016. It appears that in the instant case, the referring claimants have submitted three copies of sale deeds vide No. 1-7105 dated 21.06.2004, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 and 1-10778 dated 23.10.2006 which are marked as Exhibit-1 series. 13. On the other hand the O.P. No. 2 has produced four sale deeds vide No. 1-6431 dated 25.07.2003, 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003, 1-5662 dated 04.07.2003 and 1-8065 dated 09.09.2003 which are marked as Exhibit-A, B, C and D to substantiate their respective claims. Out of these three sale deeds produced by the referring claimants, sale deed vide No. 1-8511 dated 24.09.2003 was also considered by the L.A. Collector for assessment of compensation. But the L.A. Collector did not accept the sale deed No. 1-7105 dated 21.06.2004 because it pertains to a small piece of land which attract more buyers and fetch more price than large track of land so that, according to the L.A. Collector, cannot represent the real average prevailing market value of Bastu class of land. 14. But on perusal of the claim statement of the referring claimants and the counter statement of O.P. No. 2, it appears that the acquired land has already been developed and could be used as commercial or residential plot. Therefore, the price of the land should fetch higher rate. Because the O.P. No. 2 has already stated in their counter statement that the acquired land is situated at Indranagar Village which is adjoining to Agartala Town and urbanization is progressing very rapidly and as such, the classification of land does not hold much importance on the price of land. As a result, there is strong demand for the land, suitable for construction of houses. 15. It appears that in the instant case, the notification was made on 14.12.2005. The deed No. 1-10778 was executed on 23.10.2006 i.e. after the date of notification. As a result, there is strong demand for the land, suitable for construction of houses. 15. It appears that in the instant case, the notification was made on 14.12.2005. The deed No. 1-10778 was executed on 23.10.2006 i.e. after the date of notification. So that deed cannot be taken straightway into consideration for assessment of the rate. It also appears that the sale deeds which are produced for consideration for determining the quantum of the award, the consideration value of the land related to the deed No. 1-7105 dated 21.06.2004 was at Rs. 20,00,000/- per kani. The classification of that land is Bastu class. The acquired land is Nal class of land. It also appears that the potential value of viti and bastu are almost similar. However, considering the various aspects it is assumed that the value of Nal in no way can be less than half of the value of viti/bastu class of land. Moreover, the value as recorded in the sale deeds which are produced by both the parties having reference to the similar category of lands comparable with the acquired land, is Rs. 30,00,000/- per kani. 16. In the decision of the Apex Court in Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (registered) Fridkot & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in AIR 2012 SC 2721 : (2012) 5 SCC 432 , it has been observed as under: “(15) It is clear that when there are several exemplars with reference to similar lands, it is the general rule that the highest of the exemplars, if it is satisfied, that it is a bona fide transaction has to be considered and accepted. When the land is being compulsorily taken away from a person, he is entitled to the highest value which similar land in the locality is shown to have fetched in a bona fide transaction entered into between a willing purchaser and a willing seller near about the time of the acquisition. …….” 17. It has been thus held that on considering the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, the referring claimants are entitled to get the value of the acquired land at Rs. 15,00,000/- per kani having due regard to the rate of the land situated at the close proximity, but in the different class. 18. Thus, Mr. …….” 17. It has been thus held that on considering the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decision, the referring claimants are entitled to get the value of the acquired land at Rs. 15,00,000/- per kani having due regard to the rate of the land situated at the close proximity, but in the different class. 18. Thus, Mr. Dasgupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant is correct when he contended that the Principles of Section 28A of the L.A. Act, 1894, the uniform rate should have been awarded. Thus, the land value is reduced to Rs. 5,00,000/- per kani for the Nal class of land in terms of the judgment dated 28.07.2017 [In-charge, HR-ER, ONGC Ltd vs. Smti. Rani Bala Debnath and Others]. On the basis of the said rate, the compensation shall be drawn giving all the components under Section 23(1A) and (2) of the Land Acquisition Act. 19. It is further made clear that the solatium shall carry interest in terms of Section 34 of the L.A. Act meaning from when the land was notified for acquisition. The additional amount of the compensation shall be paid within a period of three months from the date the appellant receives the order. 20. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed to the extent as indicated above.