ORDER : Krushna Ram Mohapatra, J. 1. Heard Mr. N.K. Dash, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. G.N. Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-opposite party. 2. The appellant in this appeal assails the judgment and award dated 16.07.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Keonjhar in L.A.M.J.C. No. 34 of 2001 awarding a compensation of Rs. 75,600/- in favour of the appellant. 3. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the appellant submits that an area of Ac. 0.63 decimals of land (Sarada-II) under Khata No. 93 consisting of six plots in Mouza Bampur in the district of Keonjhar was acquired for construction of Daitari-Bansapani Railway link. The Land Acquisition Officer in L.A. Case No. 4/98 awarded a sum of Rs. 18,199.44 paise at the rate of Rs. 28,888/- per acre. Being not satisfied, the appellant filed an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') and the matter was referred to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Keonjhar, who passed the impugned award. He further submits that Ext. 1 relates to Registered Sale Deed executed by one Panchanan Nanda in favour of the President of India through the Divisional Engineer, Telecom Project of Eastern Zone, Calcutta for an area of Ac. 0.50 decimals for a consideration of Rs. 1,10,000/-. The said land was a Taila Kissam of land and the acquired land of the appellant was a superior class of land, i.e. Sarada-II. Although the same was accepted by the learned Civil Judge, he without taking into consideration Ext. 1, placed reliance on an award in L.A.M.J.C. No. 32 of 2001 (Ext. 2) and passed the impugned award. It is his submission that since inferior quality of land, i.e. Taila Kissam of the land has been sold at Rs. 1,10,000/- for Ac. 0.50 decimals, the award passed in the case at hand requires enhancement. 4. Mr. G.N. Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-opposite party, on the other hand, submits that Ext 1 relates to a small piece of land, i.e. Ac. 0.50 decimals. There is no evidence on record to show that the same situates near to the acquired land. Further, there is material available on record to show that the land covered under. Ext. 1 situates near to the town area and has a higher potentiality. Further, Ext. 0.50 decimals. There is no evidence on record to show that the same situates near to the acquired land. Further, there is material available on record to show that the land covered under. Ext. 1 situates near to the town area and has a higher potentiality. Further, Ext. 2 relates to the land covered under the self-same notification for the same village and the learned Civil Judge should have awarded lesser amount than the awarded in the impugned award. 5. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that although learned Civil Judge has referred to Ext 1 and accepted that Taila Kissam of land is inferior to Sarada-II Kissam of land, he has not discussed as to why Ext. 1 cannot be taken into consideration for determination of the market value of the acquired land. Although he has relied upon the, award passed in L.A.M.J.C. No. 32 of 2001 (Ext. 2), it is only acceptable when no other materials available on record to determine the market value. 6. In that view of the matter the impugned order dated 16.07.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Keonjhar in L.A.M.J.C. No. 34 of 2001 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Keonjhar for fresh adjudication keeping in mind the observations made above and after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned to lead further evidence with regard to acceptability of Exts. 1 and 2. 7. Accordingly, the LAA is disposed of. 8. LCR' be sent back forthwith. 9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.