ORDER : BIREN VAISHNAV, J. 1. All these Appeals arise out of the Judgment and Award dated 29.7.2015 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana in respective Land Acquisition Reference (for short “LAR”) Cases. By the Awards in question, the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mehsana enhanced the compensation of the Appellants – Claimants to Rs.107/per Square Meter. 2. The present Appeals have been filed by the Appellants – Claimants for enhancement of compensation from Rs.107 per Square Meter to Rs.540/per Square Meter. 3. Mr. Yatin Soni, learned Counsel for the Appellants would submit that the lands in question are situated in village Dhadhusan, Taluka Visnagar, District Mehsana. The lands were acquired for Sujlam Suflam Canal. The Section 4 Notification was published on 3.7.2004 and Notification under Section 6 was published on 26.8.2004 and the award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 was passed on 15.9.2004. 4. Mr. Yatin Soni, learned counsel for the Appellants would submit that for the land contiguous to the village in the present case, namely for village Gojaria acquired for the same purpose, First Appeals were filed before this Court, which were ultimately decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos.9061-9110 of 2011 dated 1.11.2017. 5. Similarly for the lands at Vasai also which are contiguous to the lands of village Dhadhusan, Taluka Visnagar, District Mehsana, First Appeal No.2513 of 2011 and other allied Appeals were filed before this Court wherein considering the Order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Appeals concerning village Gojaria, this Court passed an Order on 23.8.2019. The relevant paragraph Nos.8 to 12 are reproduced as under: “8.0. Upon considering the submissions made and contention raised before us, it would be appropriate to note that before the Reference Court the respondents have themselves relied upon the award passed in case of village Gojaria and the Reference Court has determined the market value based upon the award passed by the Reference Court in Land Reference Case Nos. 66 of 2003 and 68 of 2003 to 70 of 2003 wherein Section 4 Notification is dated 25.03.1991 for the lands situated at village Gojaria and has determined the market value of the lands in question situated at village Vasai at Rs.75.05 per sq mtr. 66 of 2003 and 68 of 2003 to 70 of 2003 wherein Section 4 Notification is dated 25.03.1991 for the lands situated at village Gojaria and has determined the market value of the lands in question situated at village Vasai at Rs.75.05 per sq mtr. It was the case of the respondents themselves before the Reference Court that the reliance placed by the appellants i.e. original land owners on the award of village Kherava and Samo are not comparable and the award passed in Land Reference Case of village Gojaria are comparable. Having taken such stand before the Reference Court, the respondents now cannot be permitted in these appeals filed by the land owners and having not challenged the same to contend that the award passed in case of Gojaria is not comparable instance as Hon'ble Supreme Court has now determined the market value of the lands situated at village Gojaria at Rs.540/ pe sq mtr. The map at Exh.31 shows that village Gojaria and Vasai are nearby villages and village Gojaria and Dhandhusan are adjacent to each other. The evidence also indicates that vide order dated 6.8.2003 at Exh.25, the Collector had determined the market value of the land of village Vasai admeasuring 3000 sq mtr was allotted to Telecom Department at Rs.500/ per sq mtr. Even in his cross examination, the witness of the respondent at Exh.33 has stated that price of lands given go Telecom Department at the rate of Rs.500/ per sq mtr was determined by the District Valuation Committee. 9.0. It also deserves to be noted that respondents have not adduced any other evidence and have also not challenged the award impugned in these appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide common judgment and order dated 1.11.2017 has observed thus: “Leave granted. We have set aside the decision of the Mansa relied upon by the High Court in the instant case, in Civil Appeal Nos.9061-9110 of 2011 by a separate judgment delivered today. In this case, the land acquisition was in the village Gojaria for which, Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, had been issued on 03.07.2004. In the instant case, 40 percent deduction has been made by the Reference Court. We find that the determination made by the High Court could not be said to be appropriate. The determination made by the Reference Court appears to be reasonable. In the instant case, 40 percent deduction has been made by the Reference Court. We find that the determination made by the High Court could not be said to be appropriate. The determination made by the Reference Court appears to be reasonable. We set aside the judgment of the High Court, and restore that of the Reference Court in the instant cases. The appeals stand allowed. 9.1. Having taken a definite stand before the Reference Court, the respondents cannot now be permitted to contend to the contrary. The respondents have not been able to point out anything from the evidence on record that there is any difference in the type of lands situated at village Gojaria and village Vasai and as stated herein above, before the Reference Court the stand of the respondent was that the best exemplar for determining the market value for the lands situated at village Vasai is that of village Gojaria. The best exemplar as per the evidence on record is considered by the Reference Court while determining the market price is the award passed for lands of village Gojaria. 10. Considering the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mehrawal Khewaji Trust (Regd) Faridkot and ors vs. State of Punjab and Ors reported in AIR 2012 SC 2721 , the highest comparable exemplar has to be accepted. It also deserves to be noted that judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is relied upon by the appellants before this Court relates to village Gojaria wherein Section 4 Notification is of the same date i.e. 3.7.2004 and even the public purpose is the same i.e. Sujlam Suflam Canal. Considering map which was produced by the learned AGP for perusal of this Court which is similar to the map at Exh.31 clearly shows that lands were acquired for the same purpose i.e. for laying down Sujlam Suflam Irrigation Project. In light of the aforesaid and considering the market value as determined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of village Gojaria, the same being highest and best exemplar is to be considered as most comparable instance for determining the market value for the lands in question also. The Reference Court has also considered the market value of the lands situated at village Gojaria as best exemplar. The Reference Court has also considered the market value of the lands situated at village Gojaria as best exemplar. There is no evidence on record to show that lands in question situated at Vasai are in way different than the lands acquired for the same public purpose vide notification under Section 4 of the Act issued on the same day situated at Gojaria. The contention raised by Mr. Patel learned AGP deserves to be negatived. The exemplar of the lands situated at Gojaria being the best exemplar, is to be taken as the best exemplar for determining the market value of the lands under acquisition. The contention raised by Mr. Patel that in view of distance of 2 km. between the lands acquired at Gojaria and the present acquired lands, there should be deduction to the tune of 40%, deserves to be negatived also in light of the fact that the respondents State authorities have not been able to show any difference in type of lands i.e. under acquisition and the land which was considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court situated at village Gojaria. The factum that Gojaria is now a taluka place, cannot be considered as development has taken place after the relevant date i.e. after the date of Section 4 Notification in the instant case. On the contrary, the Hon'ble Apex Court has determined the market value of the land situated at village: Gojaria for the acquisition which was initiated by Section 4 Notification of the same date. 11. Mr. Soni learned advocate for the appellants has made statement at the bar that even considering some difference of geographical location, the appellants are ready and willing to accept the market value of Rs.500/ taking into consideration the said concession made by the learned advocate for the appellants. We determined the market value of the lands in question situated at village Vasai at Rs.500/ per sq mtr. The appellants original owners would be entitled to Rs.500 per sq mtr as compensation along with all statutory benefits. 12. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present appeals are partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment and award remain unaltered. However, there shall be order as to costs.” 6. Mr. 12. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present appeals are partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award is modified to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the judgment and award remain unaltered. However, there shall be order as to costs.” 6. Mr. Soaham Joshi, learned Assistant Government Pleader would oppose the Appeals and contend that though the villages of Vasai and Gojaria would be nearby villages, they would not be compatible for instances of awarding compensation. 7. Perusal of the Oral Judgment dated 23.8.2019 of First Appeal No.2513 of 2011 and allied matters of Division Bench of this Court, wherein, the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been reproduced in paragraph No.9, it cannot be said that the village of present Appellants i.e. Dhadhusan, Taluka Visnagar, District Mehsana should not receive compensation at par with the villages Gojaria and Vasai which were a subject matter of the Appeals before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court respectively. 8. Upon considering the submissions made by the learned Counsels for the respective parties, we think it fit to enhance the compensation in the respective Land Reference Cases and award compensation @ Rs.520/per Square Meter in respect of the lands in question to the Appellants Claimants. The Appellants Claimants were already awarded a sum of Rs.107/per Square Meter and, therefore, they would be entitled to additional compensation of Rs.413/per Square Meter so as to their entitlement of total compensation of Rs.520/per Square Meter. 9. In view of above, the Appeals are accordingly allowed. The compensation is enhanced accordingly. The impugned award stands modified and the Appellants – Claimants shall be entitled to additional compensation of Rs.413/per Square Meter and the Respondents are directed to pay such additional amount of compensation as per the directions of the Reference Court. However, the rate of interest on the additional amount of compensation shall be @ 9% p.a. from the date of the Award of the Reference Court i.e. 29.7.2015. Such compensation shall be paid within Four Months from the date of receipt of Writ of this Order.