JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. Since, common question of law and facts are involved in both the aforesaid appeals, hence, both are being disposed, of, by a common judgment. 2. The landowners' land, was, acquired for a public purpose, and, the Land Acquisition Collector concerned, determined vis-a-vis the acquired lands, hence, compensation amount, comprised, in a sum of Rs.90,000/- per kanal, irrespective, of, the diverse classification, of, land(s), as, brought to acquisition. Being aggrieved therefrom, the landowners, through, the Collector concerned, hence, cast reference petition(s) under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, before, the learned Reference Court, and, the latter enhanced, the amount of compensation, to, a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- per kanal, irrespective, of, contradistinct classifications, of, lands as brought to acquisition. Being aggrieved therefrom, the appellant(s) herein preferred the instant appeal before this Court, for hence begetting its reversal. 3. The learned counsel appearing, for, the appellant(s) has with much vigour contended, before, this Court that, the apposite besides tangible materials rather hence begetting satiation, of, the twin principles, enjoined to be borne in mind, by the learned reference Court, while adjudging compensation amount, principles whereof are comprised in, (a) proximity in time angle, evinced, from the execution of apposite sale exemplars, bearing proximity in time vis-a-vis the issuance of the apposite notification, AND, (b) the lands borne in the apposite sale exemplars, also, holding proximity in location angle vis-avis the location of the lands, as, brought to acquisition, are hence rather borne, in sale exemplars, embodied in Ex.RW1/A, and, in Ex.RW1/B, (i) AND, he further contends, that the discarding of the aforesaid, renders the impugned award(s), to be, ingrained with an inherent legal frailty. The aforesaid submission is not amenable for acceptance, by this Court, given RW-1, who tendered the aforesaid sale exemplars, into evidence, rather not during the course, of, his examination-in-chief, hence making, any, apt candid voicings qua rather satiation(s) being meted, qua the afore referred twin principles. Reiteratedly, hence, no reliance was amenable, to be placed thereon. 4. The aforesaid submission is not amenable for acceptance, by this Court, given RW-1, who tendered the aforesaid sale exemplars, into evidence, rather not during the course, of, his examination-in-chief, hence making, any, apt candid voicings qua rather satiation(s) being meted, qua the afore referred twin principles. Reiteratedly, hence, no reliance was amenable, to be placed thereon. 4. The learned counsel appearing, for, the appellant(s), has thereafter proceeded, to contend before this Court (i) that any imputation of credence vis-a-vis Ex.PW2/A, exhibit whereof, carries therein, the average annual sale price vis-a-vis Barani Abal category of land, AND, appertains to the mohal concerned, wherein, the lands brought, to acquisition, are located, is also fallible, (ii) given the preparation, of, Ex.PW2/A, occurring four years subsequent to the issuance, of, the apposite notification, and, hence it visibly being a post notification average annual sale price, appertaining, to barani abal category of land, hence no credence, is, liable to be meted thereto. However, the aforesaid submission, also, lacks vigour, as, a circumspect perusal, of, paragraph No.14 of the award(s) impugned before this Court, rather, contains a valid reason, assigned by the learned reference Court, for, imputing credence thereto, (ii) especially when the learned reference Court, has proceeded to deduct 10% for each year, commencing since 2004, upto, the year of issuance of the apposite notification, from, the average sale price, carried therein, of, barani abal category, of, land, as, embodied in Ex.PW2/A. The meteings, of, apt deduction(s), hence, also wanes, the effect, if any, qua the preparation, of, Ex.PW2/A, rather, carrying a post notification computation, of, one year average annual sale price, of, barani abal category of land. In summa, the computation of compensation, by the learned reference Court, vis-avis, the lands, as, brought to acquisition, is, squarely grooved besides anvilled, upon, an appropriate appreciation, of, the material on record, and, warrants no interference. 5. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the instant appeals, and, they are dismissed accordingly. The impugned award(s) are maintained and affirmed. No costs. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.