JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The instant appeal stands directed against the award rendered by the learned Additional District Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., upon, Land Ref. Pet. No.5/4 of 2006/2005, whereunder, he rather dismissed the afore reference petition, as, preferred therebefore, by the landowners/appellants herein. 2. The learned Reference Court, had, discarded the probative vigour of sale exemplars, respectively, embodied in Ex.P-1, and, in Ex.P-2, whereunder, respectively, lands measuring 3 biswas, and, land measuring 4 biswas, stood respectively hence sold, for, sale considerations, of Rs.55000/-, and, Rs.80,000/-, (i) on anvil given theirs remaining unproven in accordance with law. The afore assigned reason by the learned Reference Court, for, discarding the probative vigour, of, the afore sale exemplars, as, embodied in Ex.P-1, and, in Ex.P-2, is rudderless, (ii) given a catena of decisions rather making a candid expostulation of law, that, the mere tendering into evidence, of, certified copies, of, the apposite sale exemplars, rather beffitingly rendering the apposite sale exemplars being readable in evidence, nor there being any dire necessity, of, the apposite sale exemplars, being proven by the vendee thereof or vendors thereto. Since, the afore sale exemplars hence comprise rather certified copies thereof, hence, both are admissible, and, are also readable in evidence, (iii) dehors neither the vendors thereof, nor vendees thereof, hence, stepping into the witness box, for proving the factum of their valid, and, due execution. However, the probative vigour thereof, would be subsumed, upon, emergence of evidence, hence making trite displays, (iv) that, the sale consideration borne therein, being rigged, given the imminent likelihood, of, the land in proximity thereof, being brought to acquisition. However, the aforesaid evidence is amiss nor the appellant herein ever beffitingly endeavoured, for, hence enabling the making, of, a firm conclusion qua the signatures of the vendors and vendees thereof, as, borne thereon, being fictitious. In aftermath, the due and valid execution, of, the afore sale exemplars, hence, stands, cogently proven. 3. However, the aforesaid evidence is amiss nor the appellant herein ever beffitingly endeavoured, for, hence enabling the making, of, a firm conclusion qua the signatures of the vendors and vendees thereof, as, borne thereon, being fictitious. In aftermath, the due and valid execution, of, the afore sale exemplars, hence, stands, cogently proven. 3. Be that as it may, the apposite statutory notification stood issued, on 8.6.2002, and, the sale exemplar, borne in Ex.P-1, is, of a period prior thereto, inasmuch as, its execution appertains, to 26.8.2000, (i) hence, the principle qua its execution, occurring, in close proximity, in time angle, vis-a-vis, the issuance, of, the statutory notification, rather remains unsatiated, (ii) whereas, the sale exemplar embodied in Ex.P-1, stood executed on 15.2.2001, and, the apposite statutory notification stood issued, in close proximity thereto, inasmuch, as on 8.6.2002, (iii) hence, Ex.P-2 does satiate, the principle of proximity in time angle, inter se the issuance of statutory notification, vis-a-vis, the execution of Ex.P-2. The afore conclusion, vis-a-vis, hence satiation being meted by Ex.P-2, vis-a-vis, principle of proximity in time angle, vis-a-vis, its execution, and, the issuance of the statutory notification, (iv) gathers immense momentum, for, want of adequate evidence, in rebuttal thereof hence remaining unadduced by the respondents, (v) besides, despite, the appellants tendering, it, into evidence, the respondents not adducing any evidence, in display, qua it being discardable, on anvil of Ex.P-2, not satiating, the, secondary principle of proximity in location angle, (vi) principle whereof is anchored, upon, the trite factum of the lands borne therein, holding proximity, visa-vis, acquired lands, (vii) thereupon, the respondents stand, concluded to hence acquiesce qua the afore principle also coming to be satiated by the lands, borne in Ex.P-2. In aftermath, the market value of the acquired land, on anvil of Ex.P-2, is assessed in a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rs.twenty thousand only) per biswa. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants contends, that, no compensation stood assessed, vis-a-vis, five fruit bearing trees, wherefrom he was rearing cash crops worth Rs.40,000/- each, (i) hence, he strives for assessment of compensation in respect of fruit bearing trees, growing upon the acquired land. For sustaining the afore espousal, the learned counsel for the appellants, has relied, upon, the bald depositions of PW-1, and, of PW-2. For sustaining the afore espousal, the learned counsel for the appellants, has relied, upon, the bald depositions of PW-1, and, of PW-2. Both of whom whereof were during the course of their respective crossexaminations, put apposite suggestions qua no fruit growing trees standing, upon the acquired land, nor from each hence cash crop worth Rs.40,000/- per annum, being reared. Dehors, the afore manner of denial of the afore propagation, of the claimant/petitioners/appellants herein, yet it was incumbent upon them to tender into evidence, the best documentary evidence, comprised in the apt receipts, personifying the factum qua, from, each mango tree, theirs rearing, an, income of Rs.40,000/- per annum. However, the afore documentary evidence remained unadduced, hence, non computation of compensation by the learned Reference Court, qua therewith, is, both apt besides tenable. 5. Furthermore, the learned counsel, appearing for the appellants, (i) has strived to seek computation, of compensation, vis-a-vis, damages encumbered, upon, their unacquired land, abutting the acquired land. However, in respect thereof, apart, from the bald testimony of the claimants, no cogent evidence, hence, making a loud display qua the unacquired land of the landowner, abutting the acquired land, prior to the apposite acquisition, rather rearing immense profit to the landowners, and, after acquisition of land(s), hence, abutting thereto, there being evident diminution of profit. The non adduction, of, the afore best evidence, hence, constrains this Court to conclude, that, no damages accrued or stood encumbered upon the landowners, visa-vis, their land(s) abutting the acquired land, hence, no compensation, is assessable, in respect thereof. 6. For the foregoing reasons, the instant appeal is partly allowed and the market value of the acquired land is assessed at Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty thousand only) per biswas, irrespective of the kind, and, nature of the land, at the time of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act, and, the appellants/landowners are also held entitled, to all the statutory benefits, under the Act. Consequently, the impugned award is modified to the above extent only. All pending applications also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.